Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Rename proposal for the lists of basic topics

This project's subject has a page in the set of Lists of basic topics.

See the proposal at the Village pump to change the names of all those pages.

The Transhumanist 10:38, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

• The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
• The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
• A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:16, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Map on Developed country

I'm having a discussion on Talk:Developed country over the prominent placement of a seemingly arbitrary map in the article lead. I'm debating it with just one other person, the user who created and placed the image, and who I am starting to feel isn't receptive to my concerns. I am not asking for a troop of cronies, just some community consensus in regards to the image since it is a hotly disputed topic with many definitions and open to much contention. Thanks. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 10:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 1277 articles are assigned to this project, of which 320, or 25.1%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place a template on your project page.

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 16:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

{{electiontable}} versus {{election table}}

Erm... ...which are we supposed to use? Almost identical, except for some syntax. {{election table}} was created in December 2007; {{electiontable}} was created in February 2006. Why the duplication??? Kelvinc (talk) 02:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Two questions

Hello everyone. I have two questions for you. First, at the top of this page it says that the project is in an "extended hibernation" – what does this mean? Second, would anyone object to changing the 'Nationality' heading in the list of participants to either 'Location' or 'Country'? Nationality is not an unambiguous term, and I think that a group that focuses on politics ought to strive for neutrality. Let me know what you think. – SJL 02:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Since no one has objected, I'll go ahead and change 'Nationality' to 'Location'. – SJL 04:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Libertarianism

Should WikiProject Libertarianism become a subproject of this one? The only reason I haven't done so is that libertarianism is also a philosophy. EVCM (talk) 18:58, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

This project originally was created by a sock puppet of a banned user, who now has an IP block. However, a few people have joined and re-created it according to legit editors' needs. I know that philosophy didn't want libertarianism in their template, so I think that this would be the best place to add it as a project - but not sure where projects are listed, unless it is under "related projects." If so, then it doesn't seem necessary - or does it? Carol Moore 19:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Politics

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama FAR

Barack Obama has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Harvey Milk

This biography has been recently rewritten to coincide with the anniversary of their death on November 27 as well as a feature film on them released around the same date. While awaiting further research material on request from libraries as well as some licensing for images it is now in a peer review. Other editors are welcome to offer constructive feedback and assistance. -- Banjeboi 04:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Palinism

I've requested at Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences that a stub be created for Palinism - nominally, the philosophy of candidate Sarah Palin. Term gets 7,000+ Google hits on 25 Sept 2008, so passes at least the preliminary test for notability. (The first response of somebody reading this is that we should just redirect to Sarah Palin - let's do that if it's a good idea, and not do that if it's not a good idea.) -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 02:53, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay -- IMHO should redirect to Political positions of Sarah Palin. Comments? -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

On 26 September I added a request to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences for Palinism -- the term had 7,000+ Google hits on 25 Sept 2008, has 9,000+ ghits today, 3 October.

On 28 September 2008 User:Horologium deleted this with the comment "Removed salted topic."

If you click on Palinism you see the note/rationale "deleted "Palinism" (G10: Attack page or negative unsourced BLP: Neologism).

Perhaps some existing article Palinism had problems, but IMHO that's not justification for salting it -- just fix it.

I suggested above that Palinism should just redirect to the existing, non-salted article Political positions of Sarah Palin. This seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Comments? -- 201.53.7.16 (talk) 06:44, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

(Cross-posted from my talk page; this discussion has been forum-shopped to several different locations.)
The problem was not so much with your suggestion, but rather what was there when I speedy deleted it; it was not a discussion of Palin's beliefs, but rather an attack on Palin's speaking style, with a link to Bushism, and similar text. I discovered your link in the requested articles section hours later, and removed it because the term had been salted. I salted it because anything other than a protected redirect is likely to turn into another version of the article I deleted, and because there is no currency for the term outside of blogs and other opinion sites. A Google news search a moment ago returned 28 hits, most of which were op/ed columns or blogs. Someone who is interested in Sarah Palin's political views will more likely search Sarah Palin (which has a handy link to the political views page) than Palinism. "Palinism" is likely to remain confined to bloggers, which are not reliable sources and cannot be used to establish notability or substantiate statements made in Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, and that includes using it to support or oppose a candidate for office. Horologium (talk) 12:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with 201.53.7.16 that it should redirect: to political positions of Sarah Palin if the usage of the word "Palinism" refers to these positions, or to Sarah Palin if it refers to something else. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 18:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

New article related to politics, please review

I've just created Global Strategy Group, a very influential Democratic political consulting firm based in New York City (especially influential in New York state). The company has clients not only in the U.S. but in other countries (although I don't yet have much information in the article about that). Anyone with an interest is invited to look it over for improvements and possibly adding it to this WikiProject. I think several of the partners are probably notable enough for their own articles as well. -- Noroton (talk) 15:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

2008/9 Wikipedia for Schools

The 2008/9 Schools Wikipedia is now available for browsing and feedback is welcome. Downloads start in two weeks so final improvements are possible; this is a big project with millions of users so it is worth doing well. The list of politics topics included is here. Feedback welcome at Wikipedia:Wikipedia CD Selection. Historical versions of articles were hand picked by volunteers, choice of topic was manual mainly from the version 1.0 selectionbot output. There is a significant UK selection bias of course. --BozMo talk 10:42, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Is this schools that teach politics or what? Thanks. Carol Moore 13:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)Carolmooredc

The DVD is aimed at all schools which broadly follow a UK education curriculum (which includes a lot of English speaking Africa etc.). Politics sits in the UK curriculum subject of "citizenship" and the DVD is aimed at ages 8-18 roughly. The DVD generally gets put on school intranets where either there is no internet available (much of the developing world) or where internet access is limited for other reasons. --BozMo talk 15:58, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

some help

please help update and add info to the article Frank T. Johns an infobox and appropriate categorizing would help to. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 21:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Jouke de Vries

Can you guys place this Dutch politician article stub under your scope and will you perhaps try to improve it furthermore?It is a DYK-candidate and can make it to the main page if only a few improvements are made. Help is needed urgently for if we wait to long it'll expire and no longer can become DYK article. -The Bold Guy- (talk) 13:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

FLC

List of Prime Ministers of Sri Lanka is currently a Featured List Candidate. All editors are invited to participate here. Any comments and suggestions will be welcome. Chamal ^Talk ± 03:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

United States statewide political official templates

Within Category:United States statewide political official templates Sardanaphalus (talk · contribs) and I are attempting to format templates for United States statewide elected political officials. We are having an issue with the fact that about half the State Supreme Courts are elected and half are appointed. Thus, templates like {{Current Illinois statewide political officials}} include the judicial branch of government and templates like {{Current California statewide political officials}} do not. Do you think it is better to only include elected officials for consistency or should we add the jurists to all templates with a comment underneath that they were appointed (which looked like this)?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:54, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Why not just say "statewide political officials" and avoid the question of whether or not they were elected? --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 22:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

The judges of a state's highest court should be included in the template. If those judges are appointed, make a note of that in the template. SMP0328. (talk) 22:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC) -- from User talk:Sardanaphalus.

• Either of these not much hassle to implement as the templates previously included the judges with the label "...(elected)" or "...(appointed)". Sardanaphalus (talk) 01:12, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

• We can easily enough revert the templates to add the appointed ones. I just wasn't sure if for some accountability reason it might be important to show people who were elected and not show those that weren't. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

It's probably best not to make a mention of elected/appointed in the template - there are so many variations of "elected" and "appointed" you'll end up with a cumbersome template otherwise. (e.g. Iowa's system - the governor gets 3 justice choices from a panel, he appoints the justice; every so many years the justice must stand for a retention election). Also, it's not really relevant if the purpose of the template is to make it easy to navigate from one top state official to another. As for accountability reasons, it's not Wikipedia's job to comment there, I don't think. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 18:30, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Harvey Milk at FAC has not received many responses

Just to let you know: Harvey Milk is at FAC. If you think it deserves to be promoted, please respond on that FAC page. If you think something should be changed or fixed in the article, please respond on that FAC page. There have been fewer FAC reviewers lately. I am concerned that the article will go unnoticed for the most part and archived for lack of response. It will probably stay at FAC for another week. I'm going to leave similar messages at other WikiProjects. --Moni3 (talk) 14:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Peer review for Denise Phua

I just finished writing an article about Singaporean politician Denise Phua and believe it has GA potential. Hence I have filed a PR for the article. Members of this WikiProject are invited to review the article. Since the project "particularly welcomes participants from non-Anglophone countries", surely you would love to see an article about a Singaporean politician attain GA status? --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 13:15, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

proposal to merge

I was disappointed to learn that WikiProject Elections and Referenda is inactive. In order to revive it, I propose to convert WP:WPE&R into a task-force of your WikiProject. Please reply at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Elections and Referenda. 69.140.152.55 (talk) 22:31, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Joewurzelbacher2010

An article I created, Joewurzelbacher2010 was deleted while I was in the process of writing the article. Does anyone know where I may get a copy of the article, the copy that was deleted? Multiple reliable sources were added, but there were more to be added and expounded upon. I had placed an "underconstruction tag" on the article. I would like to be able to complete it (on a user page) and then resubmit it in the future if/when it is notable. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 02:48, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

College Republicans GA

I rewrote the College Republicans article and it has been waiting for a GA review for a month now at Wikipedia:Good article nominations#Politics and government. Maybe someone from this project wishes to perform the GA review? . --Dr. Ivo Shandor (talk) 05:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Neopatrimonialism needs help

Back in February I made a major overhaul to neopatrimonialism. Political science is way outside my normal expertise, so I tagged it as needing expert review. Nothing significant has happened to the article in the meantime, so I'm appealing here for someone to take a look at the article and give it some expert love. Mangoe (talk) 14:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

user banner

is there a user banner for this project? after many months I was just about to sit down and tag them on to my user page and I couldn't fine one for this project. Lihaas (talk) 06:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what to do with this article

...but hopefully one of you will.

Hillary Uncensored, which has exactly two inbound links, purports to be about "...the film that ended Hillary Clinton's quest for the Oval Office". It's written in glowingly advertising terms, and cites one reference which just gives a viewer figure... for late 2007.

Is it notable at all? Should we quietly get rid of it, or should it be re-edited into a more useful form? When push comes to shove, it's basically just a (popular) youtube video which doesn't much like Clinton. Shimgray | talk | 13:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama at FAR-Redux

Barack Obama has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured quality. 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 "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:15, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

"Elections in"

Hi all,

I figure it would be a good thing for people to be able to type "1934 election" or "elections 1972" or so on into the search box and end up at the right place. I see some yearly election summaries have been created already for recent years (e.g. elections in 2007), but apart from that coverage is pretty patchy, with categories such as Category:2002 elections providing the widest coverage of elections in any particular year.

With that in mind, I've started redirecting "elections NNNN", "NNNN elections", "election NNNN" and "NNNN election" to the election summary articles, where they exist, or otherwise to the yearly election categories. I've put together a table for the 20th century showing existing redirects and whether a year summary article has been put together yet.

I'm going to work my way through the whole thing eventually but it'd be cool to get some help! Cheers, — Hex (❝?!❞) 21:42, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Article Assessment

Hi, I'm a new member to Wikiproject Politics. Anyway, one o fthe articles I work on Potential Superpowers falls under the category of politics. And this article has yet to be assessed. Can someone do this for me, as I lack the experience to assess articles. Deavenger (talk) 18:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

UK Cabinet Papers 1915-1977 online

The National Archives has just launched an area of its website putting online (free) all open Cabinet Papers from 1915-77 (1977 is the last year which has been opened to the public, some earlier records deemed particularly sensitive are also not open, this is indicated within the available papers). There's also quite a lot of background on how the UK Cabinet operates, and who was in office at any given time. See http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/ David Underdown (talk) 14:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Poll: The Bill Clinton article should not include any mention of him lying about his sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky

This poll is being conducted in the Bill Clinton article. Please take the time to contribute. User5802 (talk) 01:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Template talk:Current U.S. Lieutenant Governors

There is currently a discussion going on at Template talk:Current U.S. Lieutenant Governors over whether that template should continue to serve as the template for both Lieutenant Governors and First-in-lines of succession or whether it should be split into two templates. Your input is appreciated. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 14:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:No original research/noticeboard discussion on "_____ Lobby" term

Regarding articles like: China Lobby, Cuban-American lobby, Energy Lobby, Israel lobby, Pharmaceutical lobby and similar articles that might be created. The debate here is whether you can use any information in the "___ Lobby" article that does not explicitly uses the phrase "____ Lobby." Some are saying you must take out any information where the source doesn't use that phrase. If you aren't familiar with wikipedia policy please read Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:These are not original research before opining. Thanks! Definitely something politics people might want to opine about before a lot of possibly unnecessary deletions happen in all the lobby articles. CarolMooreDC (talk) 20:18, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Jennifer Brunner GAR

Jennifer Brunner has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:28, 27 December 2008 (UTC)