Talk:Democratic Party – Democratic and Progressive Italy

Merge into Democratic Party

At this point there is a proliferation of WP articles about electoral lists running for the next general election, which is too much in my opinion. I think that we should write about these "conglomerate" lists in the main parties' articles in cases like this one, where surely the "electoral list" is not equal to the simple "party" in terms of composition, but the list is evidently dominated by the major party in the list (like in this case for PD, but also for the FI list, the Lega list, and actually many other lists running in this election and likely also in past elections). Also, in this case the PD list is actually called Partito Democratico, per un'Italia democratica e progressista (so even not the correct name which this article is called), and it actually has only the PD symbol on its logo! ­– Definitely another clue that this is just the PD list, plus some little friends... Since we usually do not create a new article for each list in each Italian election (see my examples above, FI, Lega, etc.) I don't see why creating a separate one for this case.

A different instance is the one where the list is formed by comparable parties, like for example Greens and Left Alliance (AVS) or the Italia Viva–Action list, where the list is the merging of the two parties forming it, and not the absorption of smaller parties by the larger one, like in the PD or FI cases. In cases like the AVS one, I am not sure about what is best to do – I would actually also not have the article for the joint list unless it becomes relevant enough (politically, not electorally). My hunch is that generally it suffices to describe elections and electoral lists of parties in their own parties' articles. Yakme (talk) 12:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

More articles as opposed to joint articles serve readers better. In this case, it is quite ueseful to have an article on the electoral list named "Democratic and Progressive Italy", which is formed by at least five parties. Merging it into a much larger article would make more difficult for readers to find informations about it. --Checco (talk) 06:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't think any reader would look directly for the article related to this list. But even so, the search on the WP portal can point to a redirect to the section in the PD article about IDP. Same for the internal wikilinks to IDP that are now in other articles. So, no difficulty at all for readers to find information. Yakme (talk) 06:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I totally agree with Yakme, who anticipated my perplexity on this page (I was waiting for the official presentation of the list yesterday): this page is practically useless and only favors the dispersion of information. This is always a list concerning the Democratic Party, with the addition of the wording "Democratic and progressive Italy": there is no list with this name. To be merged to the page of the Democratic Party, absolutely.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

As a counterpoint, we have a precedent for creating separate articles for electoral lists centred around particular parties, e.g. National List (Italy), Populars for Prodi, With Monti for Italy, among other examples.--Autospark (talk) 20:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

However WP does not work based on precedent. I would indeed merge also the articles just mentioned into their respective parties articles, probably except the National List which has historic importance by itself. Yakme (talk) 07:38, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Autospark: Those are all different cases: the National List was a list promoted by the Fascist Party, but it was not the Fascist Party itself (which never directly presented its own list in the elections); Populars for Prodi was a joint list of the Italian People's Party with other parties, all represented in the symbol (however a page on the this list would not be strictly necessary); With Monti for Italy was the unitary symbol of the entire coalition led by Monti. In this case, the list concerns the Democratic Party, which has made a slight graphic change to its symbol to justify the presence on its list of candidates of other tiny centre-left parties. But the most important thing is that there is no list called "Democratic and Progressive Italy", the list is called "Democratic Party – Democratic and Progressive Italy". Surely the statute that will be deposited at the Interior Ministry for the elections will be that of the PD. A page of this type generates confusion and favors the dispersion of information, all to the detriment of readers. It must necessarily be merged to an apposite section of the Democratic Party. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

By the way, I oppose the recent move of the article from "Democratic and Progressive Italy" to "Democratic Party – Democratic and Progressive Italy". I prefer the original name, chosen by User:PLATEL, when he started the article. I am wondering what the other users who have edited the article (User:Nick.mon, User:Braganza, User:Davide King, User:Broncoviz, User:AleCapHollywood and User:Pomchi-Inu87) think about it. --Checco (talk) 19:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion it should be remain seperated from PD, it's dominated by PD and PD even used their name & Symbol for this alliance but it is still an alliance and unlike FI+allies and Lega+allies IDP has a name Braganza (talk) 19:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Checco this is the name of the list, there is no list called only "Democratic and Progressive Italy", it is not used much even colloquially: the main reference name of the list remains "Democratic Party", IDP is just a caption.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The fact that something "has a name" does not automatically make it worthy of it own article. By the way, also FI's and Lega's lists have their own name, which is something like "Forza Italia — Berlusconi for President" or analogously for Lega. Yakme (talk) 19:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Checco because the original name of this article it was written less complex than the current name. Pomchi-Inu87 (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion, PD-IDP is simply a list, like those of Lega and FI, so I would delete this page and create a proper section in the article about the PD. -- Nick.mon (talk) 23:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Nick.mon, PD-IDP is a mere list around the PD, the best solution would be a proper section in the PD's article. If this page were to remain autonomous, the current one seems to me the only possible title: since when are the articles on lists/parties entitled only with the caption and not with the main name?--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

We are talking about two issues at once, so it is easy to make confusion. The first issue is on whether the article should stay or not: all electoral lists, even minor ones like the current AVS, IC and NM, have articles, thus also IDP should have its one. The second issue is on how the article should be named: clearly, the most common name is "Democratic and Progressive Italy" (per its url italiademocraticaeprogressista.it and several sources—see [1]) and it is always better to have a shorter name. The article was moved without consensus, thus it can be moved back anytime. --Checco (talk) 20:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

all electoral lists [...] have articles definitely not true, since the FI, Lega and FdI lists do not have their own articles, and rightly so. The IDP case is fundamentally different from AVS, IC, NM, and the comparison cannot be made, because IDP is essentially the PD (similarly to FI Lega etc); while AVS, IC and NM are coalitions of comparatively relevant parties. The single reason why you insist that this must have a different article is that it has a "name", but having a name does not change the essence of the matter: IDP is the PD list at the 2022 election, so it should be a section of the PD article. Yakme (talk) 07:22, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Would that web address prove that the caption is the most common name? That web address links directly to the Democratic Party website, so it's surely not a reason to cut the name. That said, "Together for a Democratic and Progressive Italy" is a much more common name than "Democratic and Progressive Italy". It will be possible to understand if this article could actually remain autonomous or redirected to Democratic Party (Italy), when we will be able to see the statute / declaration of transparency deposited at the Interior Ministry for the 2022 general elections.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

So to recap: after more than one week of discussion on the topic of merging this article with Democratic Party (Italy), it looks like we have three editors for the merge, two editors against, and one editor bringing a counterpoint against the merge. Looks still open to more discussion to me. Regarding the issue of the name of this article, I think we can postpone the discussion until we have a final decision on the merge. Yakme (talk) 10:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Update: as expected, the officially submitted statute of IDP is actually the statute of the PD, see here. Yakme (talk) 10:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

So what? Electoral lists have no official status. However, I agree that it is a good idea to first decide whether this article should continue to exit, then its name. However, in the meantime, the article should be moved back to its original name, per User:PLATEL. --Checco (talk) 19:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

In reality, the Ministry of the Interior confirms that: 1. the list is called PD–IDP, so the previous name was wrong/seriously incomplete; 2. that the electoral list belongs only to the PD, which hosts candidates from other minor parties (as already happened in the past).--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I really do not understand why we are making an exception for IDP! Virtually at each election some minor parties' candidates run in the lists of larger parties that are politically close to them. It looks like editors here support the existence of this article only because this year the PD list has an extended name/slogan. Yakme (talk) 10:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

The difference is that, in this case, the joint list is often referred to in sources as "Democratic and Progressive Italy", hence the opportunity for having a separate article and, most notably, having it under its most common name, "Democratic and Progressive Italy". --Checco (talk) 08:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

I disagree with the claim that the joint list is often referred to in sources as "Democratic and Progressive Italy". Is there proof of the fact that this list is more often referred to as IDP than just PD? From a selective Google search it seems to me that quite the opposite is true, see IDP (20k hits) vs PD (530k hits). Yakme (talk) 06:25, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Just a note by me We Continue the Change and We Continue the Change (political party) have two different articles despite the electoral alliance just being "mandate carrier"s of the party PP and these two are in fact one and the same unlike IDP which you can see either as extension of PD or a PD-led electoral alliance Braganza (talk) 20:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

The fact that some other article exists is not a valid argument in discussions like this one. And by the way, I would definitely support the merge of the two PP articles too, given that they appear to represent the same thing politically, in two "different" forms (but how different really?) of party and electoral list. As it happens, the situation with PD and IDP is exactly the same, in the sense that both are essentially a list composed of one major party plus some politicians from minor parties that agreed to be listed in the major party's list for the election to come. Yakme (talk) 20:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, I'm mostly on the the side of keeping the standalone article, as it is well-referenced and contains information that might not necessarily be relevant to the article on PD itself (I see parallels with having an article for Populars for Prodi separate from Italian People's Party (1994)). If however at a later date the consensus is to merge the core of this article into the PD's article it wouldn't be the end of the world, but I currently err on the side of caution.--Autospark (talk) 16:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Provided that there is no consensus on deleting the article, we should focus on its name. The article was correctly started as "Democratic and Progressive Italy" and was moved without consensus. The current name is too long and is clearly not the most common name for the subject. There are virtually 4,000 hits on "lista democratica e progressista". Even more notably, during the campaing, PD leader Enrico letta has always referred to the list as "Democratic and Progressive Italy". --Checco (talk) 16:00, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

  agree with you Braganza (talk) 16:59, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

I am strongly opposed to cutting off the title of the page, depriving it of the fundamental part: in this way we would indicate among the results a list with a name without making it clear to the readers that it is actually the Democratic Party. The list concerns the Democratic Party, with a handful of candidates from other smaller parties, it cannot simply be indicated with the caption on the list. The move was inevitable, from the title it was not even understandable that it was a list of the Democratic Party. In reality, it is the standalone page itself that makes little sense.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

As a reminder, the article was moved to the current long name without any consensus. --Checco (talk) 20:14, 29 April 2023 (UTC)