This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 30 | ← | Archive 32 | Archive 33 | Archive 34 | Archive 35 | Archive 36 | → | Archive 40 |
At Maine gubernatorial election, 2018, User:MAINEiac4434 contends that a donation from an individual to a candidate equals an endorsement and thus should be included under that section on the page. I contend that an affirmative statement by the candidate or endorser is necessary to include the article and that including donors as endorsers is a violation of BLP. What are your thoughts? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Namiba (talk • contribs) 13:19, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Christian democracy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Christian democracy 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 page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 06:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Donald Trump is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Donald Trump 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 page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 11:13, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Barack Obama is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Barack Obama 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 page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 11:17, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
In case anyone is interested, see Talk:Chairman#Requested move 8 May 2019. SarahSV (talk) 23:18, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
See this discussion. Marcocapelle (talk) 17:19, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
Hello,
I have recently introduced this offer to the reward board and thought that it would be of interest to this WikiProject. To sign up leave a message on my talk page here, or sign up at the Reward Board entry here. (Do NOT edit the page immediately below, which is a transclusion.) Thanks! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:37, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
All of the U.S. Presidents to Featured status
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Political science is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Political science 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 page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 06:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
I have nominated Albert Kesselring 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. --K.e.coffman (talk) 02:16, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Cold War is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Cold War 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 page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America1000 06:13, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Hi, there is a discussion on the Talk:Brexit Party page about what terms are valid to be used in the lede to describe a party's political ideology. So for instance terms like right wing, socialist, liberal etc are relatively objective terms that I would argue can be used without description. Whereas I would argue terms like nationalist, authoritarian, and populist (which is the discussion in the Brexit Party talk page) are more subjective, and wikipedia should generally say "commentators refers to the as X because of Y". Is there any general guidance on this, especially around a list of political labels that could be used factually, and those which should only be used within the context of opinion expressed by the media etc? Thanks Jopal22 (talk) 15:55, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
There are disagreements about the input for the 'political position' parameter of the infoboxes of political parties. See for example Talk:Liberal Party of Canada#Drop "Center-Left", Talk:Democratic Party (United States)#Political position discussion, Talk:Labour Party (UK)#Centre-left to left wing. I have also heard that there have been edit wars over this issue (see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics#Removing the 'political position' field from the party infobox).
The issue was also discussed at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)/Archive_27#Political_position. The question is whether this parameter should be removed. RfC relisted by Cunard (talk) at 09:20, 6 April 2019 (UTC). VarunSoon (talk) 07:42, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
There's a somewhat entrenched RfC ongoing at Talk:Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet Union, which shows signs of devolving into name-calling. A few more comments by people conversant with the general area would be welcome. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:38, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
FYI. RfC available for comment:
This is related to Venezuelan politics.
--David Tornheim (talk) 09:56, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
There is a requested move at Talk:Republican Party of Puerto Rico (1903) that would benefit from your input. Please come and help! Paine Ellsworth, ed. put'r there 20:52, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
I've started a discussion on this at the Elections & Referendums WikiProject. Views are welcome. Cheers, Number 57 22:17, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Please see Talk:Waskom,_Texas#The_abortion_ban
WhisperToMe (talk) 10:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi, I have been asking already two projects, I need some feedback in Talk:Susanna Ceccardi. I will summarize new sources with calm (the main editing were in May after January, I planned to come back on it around the summer at the end of the fuzz of the MEP elections), and by the date I really need more feedback to refine the text if/where necessary. Personally, I think the template is excessive and the perception could have been simply solved removing one sentence but it can stay there, I just hope I have some clear feedback when it will be time to address it.--Alexmar983 (talk) 12:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
A request for comment regarding a rape allegation against Bill Shorten, an Australian politician, may be of interest to editors in this WikiProject. – Teratix ₵ 02:31, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Hello, |