Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Archive 42

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 35←Archive 40Archive 41Archive 42Archive 43Archive 44Archive 45

Landtag of Schleswig-Holstein

Hello, There is an issue with the "Landtag of Schleswig-Holstein" article that I brought up on its talk page (the "Independent Politicians" entry) that I see hasn't been addressed either way yet. In short, the article's infobox lists as independent 5 MPs who, according to all official sources I can find, appear to still be AfD members. I would fix this myself but I don't know how to go about updating the relevant graphic on the page. If someone could look at the links I included on the talk page entry and see if anything really needs to be changed it would be appreciated. 2601:405:4400:9420:5175:B20E:F653:2E42 (talk) 20:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

 Done It appears only 3 of the individuals are still AfD members according to the parliament's website. I will update the article chart and graphic for you, and add the sources into the article text. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 20:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguating Electorate

Is there a good reason for electorate to be a disambiguation page? It lists 3 possible meanings, only one of which is actually a Wikipedia page. The first entry was originally a link to the page for constituency, while the second entry linked to electoral district. Constituency has since become a redirect to electoral district, but instead of just removing the first entry, someone took out the disambiguating link to a possible Wikipedia page and just left a claim about an idea without any Wikipedia entry that "electorate" could possibly refer to. The second claim is also clearly a sub-meaning of "constituency", and does not have any Wikipedia page associated with it. So there's no disambiguating going on here. This isn't even a case of determining a WP:PTOPIC ... It looks like there is literally only one possible meaning. The reason I'm here, rather than opening a discussion on the talk page or just boldly addressing the situation, is because I'm not entirely sure which page or pages should be included in a possible solution. I think I see three main options. "Electorate" may have enough independent meaning to justify having a standalone article. But that might have already been settled in the case of constituency, so perhaps it should just redirect to electoral district. Alternatively, does someone see other meanings that aren't listed there that would compete for primary topic status to justify dismabiguating? - Astrophobe (talk) 22:42, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Comment is requested at Talk:Draghi_Cabinet#Survey_about_possible_solutions on tabulating ministers twice in the same article. Reywas92Talk 18:57, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

"smwm

2002​"smwm" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2403:6200:8831:B6D:5982:2354:E434:A43 (talk) 22:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion of interest

A discussion which may be of interest to members of this WikiProject can be found at Talk:Nazism#Paragraph dealing with NSDAP-DNVP relations. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:02, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

The 10 most-viewed, worst-quality articles according to this Wikiproject

  • 59 All India Trinamool Congress 340,247 10,975 Start Mid
  • 77 West Bengal Legislative Assembly 301,568 9,728 Start Mid
  • 91 International recognition of the State of Palestine 274,134 8,843 Start Low
  • 135 2024 United States presidential election 208,647 6,730 Start Low
  • 136 Rajya Sabha 208,285 6,718 Start Mid
  • 142 Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly 204,254 6,588 Start Mid
  • 148 Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum 196,221 6,329 Start Mid
  • 158 Constitution of India 188,772 6,089 Start Mid
  • 160 Sovereign state 188,605 6,084 Start High
  • 185 Knesset 174,128 5,617 Start Mid

Plus a bunch of unassessed articles.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics/Popular pages--Coin945 (talk) 06:20, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

The numbers are quite a bit out of date, but WP:SPVA is also helpful. Several of the shortest social science vital articles are related to political theory, including Statutory law, Executive (government), Legislature, Class discrimination and Unitary state. Jr8825 • Talk 16:04, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Category:Leadership elections has been nominated for renaming to Category:Political party leadership elections

Category:Leadership elections and 36 of its sub-categories, all of which are within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Political party leadership elections. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

I have noticed a template creep taking places across biographies of US presidents and vice presidents (e.g. [1], [2], [3]) and Indian presidents and prime ministers (e.g. [4], [5]), with sidebars being added below infoboxes without much regard to how it affects the layout.

I find these sidebars extremely intrusive. They regularly invade early life sections, push images from where they belong or squeeze them in unsightly sandwiches. They duplicate infobox images so that they appear twice in the lead. Some even duplicate the signatures. Early life sections end up with photographs of subjects in their adulthood and with links (e.g. to economic policies) that have nothing to do with the subject's childhood. Articles about US presidents already contain navboxes on the bottom, so it is unclear to me why new navigational templates with identical content are needed.

In the case of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris, talk page discussions resulted in the consensus not to use the sidebars. But with the creep gaining momentum, it is becoming impossible to discuss these on a case by case basis. A more general discussion was started at the US presidents wikiproject, but with the creep extending to politicians worldwide, I feel this is a better venue for discussing the general use of these templates. Surtsicna (talk) 11:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Yup, I noticed those series boxes/sidebars have popped up on many politician bios. IMHO, they should indeed be deleted, per the reasons you've given. GoodDay (talk) 19:14, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Just removed them at Stephen Harper & Justin Trudeau (the only two Canadian prime ministers bios, they're at), but was later reverted. GoodDay (talk) 21:46, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Most of those complaints sound like an issue easily fixed changing the image in the infobox and/or the sidebar. You also can remove the signature in the infobox if it is duplicated. None of these are things that outweigh the benefits of the sidebars. As for moving images around in early life sections, most of those can be mitigated by adjustments as well. This very much sounds like throwing the baby out with the bath water. On most pages I find them on, they don't have any of these issues you mention. I should also point out there did not appear to be consensus at Joe Biden to remove, 2 people seemed to agree and 2 seemed to not agree which should have defaulted to keeping. And Kamala Harras the consensus seems to be to only temporarily remove it until some sections were split out to their own articles. -DJSasso (talk) 22:04, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
I do hope it is as easy to fix as you say. Which adjustments can mitigate the issue of a photo of 3-year-old Gerald Ford appearing in a paragraph about his college football career? Moving the image to the left does nothing. Talk about throwing the baby out :D Perhaps the sidebars would be less offensive if there were versions without the images for the biographies themselves, so as to avoid repetition and excessive length. See the two versions of Template:Russian Imperial Family for example. Surtsicna (talk) 14:27, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Good Article Reassessment for Second impeachment trial of Donald Trump

Second impeachment trial of Donald Trump, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 20:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

Template talk:Infobox political youth organization

There is an editor who has been waiting since February for someone to add a new parameter to a template, seen here - Template talk:Infobox political youth organization. If anyone could help them it would be much appreciated. Helper201 (talk) 11:29, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Communism#Criticism

An editor seems to have decided to start niggling Communism#Criticism to death with "citation needed" and similar on individual statements. If someone with a good head library of the applicable sources wants to firm that section up a bit before the nuke brigade starts swooping in, it would probably be helpful. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:22, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

How to refer neutrally to laws with non-neutral names?

One topic that I think we ought to be thinking about as we write articles that reference laws is how to do so neutrally. For instance, the Election Integrity Act of 2021 has been widely characterized in reliable sources as a voter suppression bill or a voter ID law, and is probably more recognizable by those terms than by its formal title. When it's mentioned on other pages, referencing it as "Georgia's voter ID law" may be more informative and less likely to mislead readers than using the full name. Which laws have non-neutral enough names to warrant this sort of treatment is obviously something open to interpretation/debate, but I raise it as something to have in mind. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:50, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

"2021 Georgia elections bill" sounds good to me. Wikinights (talk) 04:50, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Yep, that could work well too. I raised that law as an example but there could be many others. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Political activity of the Catholic Church on LGBT issues

Is it appropriate for Political activity of the Catholic Church on LGBT issues to contain lengthy excerpts from sources affiliated with and/or published by the Catholic Church, with the specific aim of promoting the Church and its views, which claim that the Church opposes anti-LGBT discrimination and supports LGBT rights? Please join us on the article's talk page. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:34, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Was Charles I, King of England, Scotland & Ireland up until his execution?

Would appreciate some input at List of assassinated and executed heads of state and government, concerning whether Charles I of England should be included or not. GoodDay (talk) 01:36, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Redirect request

Can we have a redirect for the redlink Hunter Biden's laptop? I'll leave it to you experts to figure out what the redirect target should be. Thanks. 2602:24A:DE47:BA60:8FCB:EA4E:7FBD:4814 (talk) 06:16, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

How's Biden–Ukraine_conspiracy_theory#Laptop_and_hard_drive? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 00:40, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! It looks like there is at least some info there, and that's probably the best available redirect target. I'll reserve judgment about whether the article content is editorialized too much, as that is outside the scope of the redirect request. 2602:24A:DE47:BA60:8FCB:EA4E:7FBD:4814 (talk) 04:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

RfCs of interest

FYI
 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere. RfCs are underway at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States Presidents concerning the removal or retention of US president series boxes at associated articles and the removal or retention of US vice-president series boxes at associated articles.

2 horribly sourced new articles

Authorities referendum and Official collection.--Moxy- 20:17, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

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

Hello,
Please note that International law, 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, 19 July 2021 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Feedback requested at Talk:2021 Cuban protests

Your feedback would be appreciated at Talk:2021 Cuban protests/Archive 4#RfC on Authoritarianism as a cause of protests. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 16:42, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Notification of requested move at Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act

An editor has requested for Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act to be moved to INVEST in America Act. Since you had some involvement with Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America Act, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). SkyWarrior 03:43, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Missing articles for UN treaties

Hi all

After doing some research for some UN related articles I've discovered some treaties which do not have Wikipedia articles, if anyone would like to create them please do, I'm going to try and find some reliable sources for them to help get them started.

  1. Brussels Convention Relating to the Distribution of Programme-Carrying Signals Transmitted by Satellite https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q98487293
  2. Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12120337
  3. Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q98488248
  4. Trademark Law Treaty https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q11418793
  5. Washington Treaty on Intellectual Property in Respect of Integrated Circuits https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q98489149
  6. Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12120337
  7. Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q98489466
  8. Locarno Agreement Establishing an International Classification for Industrial Designs https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q98489480
  9. Vienna Agreement Establishing an International Classification of the Figurative Elements of Marks https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q98489785

Thanks very much

John Cummings (talk) 15:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Featured Article Review

I have nominated Night of the Long Knives 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. Z1720 (talk) 21:52, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Featured Article Review

I have nominated Ramón Emeterio Betances 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. Z1720 (talk) 02:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at village pump

I have started a discussion at the idea lab. Our articles on contemporary politicians are filled with minor details about their political positions, and I hope that we can address this problem across the encyclopedia. WIKINIGHTS talk 12:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Australian states

Are the governor of Tasmania & the governor of New South Wales, heads of state? GoodDay (talk) 13:11, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

Lists of elections by year

As you can see on this template, over times the pages "List of elections in XXXX" have grown so big that starting with 2010, different pages were made for Supranational electoral calendar, National electoral calendar andLocal electoral calendar. Yet the original pages continued to be made.
The result is that the content of the original page is 1) completely redundant with the other, 2) has less information 3) is ordered by continent then date, instead of fully by date.
Considering the redundancy and the lack of a purpose of such a page being just ordered differently, it was proposed on the List of elections in 2021 talk page, and implemented, to have the page shortened to links toward the others detailled ones. This was met with some oppositions, though, and the page end up the only one this way.
The question is, should we extend it to all the post 2010 pages, or revert it back to the way it was ?--Aréat (talk) 00:31, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Featured Article Review

I have nominated Hungarian Revolution of 1956 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Forward (Belgium)#Requested move 19 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Forward (Belgium)#Requested move 19 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.  — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 02:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Rationalism (international relations)#Requested move 3 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Rationalism (international relations)#Requested move 3 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.  — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 16:33, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Mass removal of Prime Ministers, Governors etc.

Many articles about nation or state leadership positions have sections listing former occupants of that role who are still living. For example this brief listing of US presidents.

As of 2021, there were five living former U.S. presidents. The most recent death of a former president was that of George H. W. Bush (1989–1993), on November 30, 2018. The living former presidents, in order of service, are:

An editor - Surtsicna - has been deleting these sections as "trivia" and there seems to have been little discussion at a Wikipedia-wide level.

There seems to be little discussion about removal of these sections. My own feeling is that providing a short gallery of living previous presidents, prime ministers etc. in an article devoted to that position is an appropriate encyclopaedic function, so commonplace as to hardly warrant discussion. But here is a crusader consigning these past glories to the rubbish bin of history. --Pete (talk) 01:03, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

I've no objections to the removal of these sections. GoodDay (talk) 01:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
This has actually been discussed somewhere before but without a hard conclusion I think. I also do not object to removal of this. List of prime ministers of the United Kingdom, List of first ministers of Scotland, and Prime Minister of Australia all have the lifespan of officeholders under their names, so it's redundant to list those who don't have a year of death given separately. Reywas92Talk 02:06, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

The tables list lifespans, so the sections are redundant. It is far from clear why the information needs to be duplicated in a separate section. Why have a section for Living former prime ministers and not for Female prime ministers or Australia-born prime ministers? Or should we have all of those? And try to be a bit more respectful towards editors with whom you disagree. WP:Assume good faith is an important guideline of this project. Surtsicna (talk) 08:20, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

You're being called a crusader, by who? My ribs are still aching. GoodDay (talk) 14:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
No further objections from anyone else? Seems like consensus to me. GoodDay (talk) 03:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

I'd prefer to see this addressed on an article-by-article basis. For Presidents of the United States, at least, I think this is a valuable section to include. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:43, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Though we do have the whole separate article Living presidents of the United States; List of presidents of the United States has neither lifespans nor this sort of section. There's also Living prime ministers of the United Kingdom for the UK, so it's again redundant. But yes, without these, it's not unreasonable to inlude this concept. Reywas92Talk 20:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Case-by-case is the way to go. There are cultural differences which may partly depend on the dignity of the office and the respect paid to it. That's higher in, say, the US than in the UK. Serving US presidents receive great ceremonial honour and even on leaving office continue to be called Mr President. In the UK, we use monarchs for ceremony and historical continuity, while Prime Ministers lose their title and don't each set up their own library. Listing living presidents in President_of_the_United_States is understandable but that doesn't mean it must be the norm for other countries. NebY (talk) 16:45, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree. Ex-POTUSs are like dowager queens in monarchies. OTOH when Macmillan was elevated to an earldom, most people were surprised he was still alive. I mean George W. Bush made the news by dancing with Ellen, but who cares what the Maybot is doing now. TFD (talk) 02:43, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Political forecasting

A draft has been submitted on Draft:Political forecasting. There already is an article on Political forecasting. The author of the draft says that the article is really on Election forecasting, which is a subset of the topic, and proposes that the existing article be renamed, and the draft accepted in its place. The draft is longer than the existing article, which is appropriate for a broader topic. Please discuss at Talk:Political forecasting. If that discussion is inconclusive, an RFC will be used. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Are there any other WikiProjects where neutrally worded notices should be posted? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:21, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Northern Chad offensive#Requested move 14 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Northern Chad offensive#Requested move 14 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 14:37, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Pardon if on wrong WikiProject

Hello, I beg your pardon from the beginning if I'm on the wrong category but I would like to draw attention to the article of former (now incarcerated) president of Bolivia Jeanine Áñez on whose article there's a requested merge dating from November 2020 related to articles Senkata and Sacaba massacres. I think this must somehow have a conclusion. If on wrong category, I reiterate my apologies. Kind regards. CoryGlee (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Made some correction to the bio article. Why was she being called both the 66th president of Bolivia & the interim president. She can't have been both. GoodDay (talk) 16:01, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Controversial requirements for candidate to the Wikimedia Board

Wrong forum. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

I noticed with concern the approved qualifications to be a candidate, namely, board experience, executive experience, and a subjective experience. Although these requirements may have instituted to provide the board with candidates with certain experience, it completely flies in the face of democracy and inclusion. I know Wikipedia is not a democracy, but this comment is about the Wikimedia elections. I have to point out that the requirements to be a Member of the United States Congress are: a minimum age of 25 years old, to have been a U.S. citizen for at least seven years before the election, and live in the state they represent. It doesn't require to have had experience as a member of other governing body nor requires to have been an executive, and it doesn't require experience in subjective matters. In addition, it is to note that reportedly the founders of the US didn't even want to institute direct democracy, but rather a form of representative democracy. I don't know the motivations of the board to institute the requirements aforementioned, but certainly it looks controversial, exclusive, and elitist.--Thinker78 (talk) 05:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Can't speak to why they specifically made that a requirement. But it is a standard requirement for any non-profit board. But they don't appear to be requiring any experience on that form. They are just asking how much experience you have. It would be silly not to ask a candidate how much experience they have, especially for a non-profit that handles millions of dollars. -DJSasso (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I suggest you discuss such issues at somewhere like the Village Pump page dedicated to discussing the Wikimedia Foundation, Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF), for a discussion with editors of the English-language Wikipedia, or at meta:Talk:Wikimedia Foundation elections/2021 for discussion with editors from various WMF wikis. I rather expect the responses will be much as DjSasso's, but you'll know you're asking in the right place. This page isn't where editors discuss the politics of the foundation, it's where we discuss the encyclopedia's coverage of politics. NebY (talk) 16:46, 25 August 2021 (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.

TFD proposal - condensing political party templates

There is a discussion at WP:TFD regarding the merging of some 16000 political party templates into one meta module. Your input would be appreciated. Primefac (talk) 11:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Why was Peter IV of Portugal, succeeded by his daughter, rather then his son, on the Portuguese throne?

Hello. Is there anyone here, who knows why Pedro, was barred from the Portuguese succession? Why his half-sister Maria was ahead of him? None of this is explained in his bio article. GoodDay (talk) 22:28, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

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

Hello,
Please note that Mona Sahlin, 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 00:06, 30 August 2021 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team

Potential superpowers GAR

See Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Potential superpowers/1 for a GAR of Potential superpowers Aircorn (talk) 01:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

FLRC for Timeline of Canadian elections

I have nominated Timeline of Canadian elections for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

The article is amazing. The time, effort & accuracy is awesome. GoodDay (talk) 05:29, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Liberal Popular Alliance#Requested move 20 July 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:27, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

PoliticalGraveyard.com at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#PoliticalGraveyard.com

For the interested. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:05, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Alcibiades FAR

I have nominated Alcibiades 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 19:33, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Uyghur genocide § Requested move 5 September 2021

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Uyghur genocide § Requested move 5 September 2021. Jr8825 • Talk 21:52, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Requested move: 1989 Tiananmen Square protests (8 September 2021)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:1989 Tiananmen Square protests § Requested move 8 September 2021 ––FormalDude talk 23:04, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Benevolent dictatorship

There's some disagreement on Talk:Benevolent dictatorship about whether the article should include a list of examples. More opinions on that welcome. Banedon (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria FAR

I have nominated Ivan Alexander of Bulgaria 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. Bumbubookworm (talk) 17:05, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Move discussion at Talk:Illegal immigration to the United States

An editor has requested for Illegal immigration to the United States to be moved to Undocumented immigration to the United States. Since you had some involvement with Illegal immigration to the United States, you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 21:04, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

RfC discussion at Talk:Second Cold War (September 2021)

I started an RfC discussion: Talk:Second Cold War#RfC: Use a map, an image, or neither? --George Ho (talk) 18:24, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Societal views on patents#Requested move 29 August 2021

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Societal views on patents#Requested move 29 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 12:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

GAR Opus Dei

Opus Dei has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Talk 16:33, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Politics/Archive_42&oldid=1081327268"