Talk:Liberal Forum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Position?[edit]

I have been an opponent of such classification in the infoboxes, i.e. adding position field in addition to political ideology. Yet, if we are to keep such a thing in numerous inxobox templates, let us discuss. Classifying the party as centrist is incorrect. Yes, they did cooperate with the SPÖ, but this was disputed within the party, too. I cannot possibly guess how a radical free-market party would be centrist. We don't call the German FDP centrist, because it converges with some of the leftist parties on the social authoriatrianism/libertarianism axis. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 12:06, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting your position by citing another country's political system is pretty prejudiced. The party is routinely described as centrist, as illustrated by the references I have provided. If you seek to change the status quo, please provide references from reliable sources per Wikipedia policy on verifiability. Bastin 12:25, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Hloušek on p.35 nicely presents a graph of the left-right spectrum in Austria, with the LiF well to the right of BZÖ. So it remains unclear, why he labels the party as centrist on the same page. I can't access the other sources you provided right now. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 12:34, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But that's not of the left-right spectrum. That is their position on socio-economic issues. However, on the other axis, they have a lot in common with the Greens. And, of course, there are a lot of other issues that are not included in the graph. How does source thus summarise that information? It calls them centrist. That is not the work of a schizophrenic author, but one not suffering from tunnel vision.
Since you've already said that you disagree with the idea of the field, let me explain it to you. It is effectively a summary of which parties in the same political system are closest to it. So, for example, despite Law and Justice being commonly described as more 'right-wing' than Civic Platform, they have views on the economy that are to the left of Law and Justice (this goes doubly for 'far-right', but highly anti-market, parties that collapsed at the last election). Why? Because Law and Justice is highly unlikely to cooperate with the left-wing parties, and so take a 'right-wing' position in the spectrum: regardless of any foreign comparison of whether they're right- or left-wing. Bastin 12:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Since you´re already in a schoolmasterly mood today, please explain me a few things further (all the more that if we are to keep such a field, we need some consensus on how to apply it). The fact that nowadays there are often two axis used (economical left-right + socially authoritarian/libertarian) is no news. But coming back to Hloušek (btw, could you please drop comparisons like 'schizophrenic author'?), just to make sure, where does his graph suit best in our terms, political ideology or position?
To cite you “['political position'] is effectively a summary of which parties in the same political system are closest to it.” I think you put us in a precarious position. I managed to get the field removed from Ukrainian pol party infobox template, but should we use this based on you definition, we would be in troubles. If the Party of the Regions is unlikely to form a coalition with the BYT and Our Ukraine (we would label those as right-wing, probably), this would position the PR as centre-left (commies would be left-wing). If so, where are the Socialists? Centre, because they can ally with both the orange forces and the Yanukovich camp? This leaving them to the right of the so-called Social Democrats, who, despite their socio-economic profile should then be labelled as being to the left of the socialists, since they wouldn't cooperate with the Orange forces at all. In Ireland, how are we to label FF and FG? The two are unlikely to cooperate, does it mean one of them is positioned on the right and the other more on the left? Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 13:44, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The graph is of no relevance, because it does not explicitly tell us the position. His statement that they are centrist does. End of story. Bastin 15:11, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh, on the contrary! This graph has much more to offer than usual political catch-words. I thought I'd be lazy this time, not bothering to look for references where I could get centre-right mentioned just passing by as centrist was in your case, but as you insist, I'll offer alternatives. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 15:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberal Forum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:25, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberal Forum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:46, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberal Forum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:23, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liberal Forum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:28, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liberal_Forum&oldid=1212781629"