Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics
|This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Politics and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
|Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24|
|Welcome to the talk space of WikiProject Politics. In this area you can find discussions, notices, requests of many articles that in some way deals with the practice of politics. If you would like to discuss, place a notice about, or if you have a request about, an article within the scope of this project, please do include it here. If you have an interest in politics and would like to contribute, please add your name to the list of participants on the project page.|
|WikiProject Politics||(Rated Project-class)|
|This talk page is automatically archived by lowercase sigmabot III. Any threads with no replies in 60 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
- 1 Defensive realism
- 2 Congressional Institute
- 3 RfC on the political position of En Marche!
- 4 RfC in Liberalism in Iran
- 5 Alt-right sidebar
- 6 Citation overkill proposal at WP:Citation overkill talk page
- 7 Template:WPF query
- 8 Le Pen political family
- 9 Please comment at Template talk:Infobox official post
- 10 National liberalism
- 11 Popular pages report
- 12 Automated assessment of article importance
- 13 How to describe the Emmett Till case in the lead sentence of the Emmett Till article
- 14 Cold War II
- 15 Merger proposal of Battle of Chamdo into Incorporation of Tibet into the People's Republic of China
- 16 WP:Citation overkill RfC
- 17 Nomination of The Plot to Hack America for deletion
- 18 Government page
- 19 Primacy discussed at Talk:Joint Communiqué
- 20 Relisted RM at Template talk:2016 US Election AE
- 21 One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!
Defensive realism means to take some hidden or deceive step to stop or to avoid unnecessary lose or injure though there has enough reason to believe the possible way seems safe but take other optional way to feel safe that is called defensive realism. it also shows that zero
Hello! I'm looking for editors who might be interested in helping me update the Congressional Institute article. As part of my work at Beutler Ink, I have drafted an updated and expanded article on behalf of the Institute. That draft is here, but there is more explanation about it in my Talk page note here. Due to my COI I won't edit the article directly, so I'm looking for neutral editors to review this draft. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 20:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
RfC on the political position of En Marche!
RfC in Liberalism in Iran
Just noticed Template:Alt-right sidebar being added to several articles. Many of the articles it includes look to me to have little-to-no connection to the alt-right beyond being part of conservative ideology more broadly, and it includes several topics that are entirely unrelated, apparent original research, etc. My question for this group is whether you think it's an appropriate navigational template in general (i.e. whether it should be radically pruned, deleted, or incorporated into, say, Template:Conservatism US). My inclination is that it's not quite a big enough topic in terms of number of articles, but I also don't have a great deal of experience with this sort of navigational template. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 03:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Citation overkill proposal at WP:Citation overkill talk page
This template reads very poorly. Presumably it is meant for article talk pages like this one where fascist status is in question because of a lack of clear sources, but it is worded as though it only applies to entities that "came to power" (the template's words), even though bona fide fascists that have actually come to power are generally described as fascist in an abundance of sources. So the template is unlikely to appear on the talk pages of articles on, say, Mussolini and Franco, but the query itself is useless for everyone else as a bunch of the criteria can't actually be applied to fringe political groups and figures that never actually seized power. Does this seem pointless to anyone else, or is it just me? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 10:57, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Le Pen political family
Please comment at Template talk:Infobox official post
Popular pages report
We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Politics.
We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:
- The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
- The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
- The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).
We're grateful to m:User talk:Community Tech bot.for his original , and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Politics, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at
Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Automated assessment of article importance
Hello everyone! I'm currently working on a project studying how to do automatic classification of article importance. As part of that project, I've done some analysis of articles within the scope of WikiProject Politics and built a model to predict article importance. Started a thread over on the assessment page with more information and a link to our predictions (as well as a few other types of articles that might need an updated importance rating). Since I hadn't seen any comments over the past week, I thought I'd get in touch in here as well, would appreciate your thoughts and comments! Regards, Nettrom (talk) 23:43, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
How to describe the Emmett Till case in the lead sentence of the Emmett Till article
Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Emmett Till#RfC: Should we include the "accused of showing an interest in a white woman" aspect in the lead or specifically the lead sentence?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 16:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I want to notify you about the article Cold War II, which I have mostly edited. Mainly I added the "US-China relations" section per RfC in Talk:Cold War II. For the time being, this article attracts those wanting to expand the content about US-Russia relations related to the topic (and its interchangeable terms). Initially, the article was created in response to events related to the US-Russia tensions. However, it experienced discussions, like the titling and the sourcing, leading to revamping the article. This year, attempts to insert presumably original research and unverifiable claims have been reverted, especially via more discussions. One suggested another AfD after the first one failed. I hope those interested in politics would be interested in preserving and watching this article. It is still attracting more presumptions related to US-Russia relations. I also hope that original research will be repelled in the future. --George Ho (talk) 22:00, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Merger proposal of Battle of Chamdo into Incorporation of Tibet into the People's Republic of China
Merger of Battle of Chamdo into Incorporation of Tibet into the People's Republic of China is proposed. It is discussed at Talk:Incorporation of Tibet into the People's Republic of China#Merger Discussion, where I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
WP:Citation overkill RfC
Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Should this essay be changed to encourage more citations?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:45, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of The Plot to Hack America for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Plot to Hack America 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/The Plot to Hack America until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Sagecandor (talk) 20:40, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Primacy discussed at Talk:Joint Communiqué
Hello. I opened the discussion at Talk:Joint Communiqué about the current title and primacy role of Joint Communiqué, an agreement between South Vietnam and Buddhist sect. --George Ho (talk) 00:49, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Relisted RM at Template talk:2016 US Election AE
One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!