Talk:Adequate Party

Left or Right
Dear community, the sources which creator of the page was provided, can't be an independent because of Conflict of interests. Please pay attention that the source such as openDemocracy and Eurasianet are projects of Open Society Foundations, and the party is anti-OSF. In openDemocracy's article, the reporter views the party absolutely negatively, and classifying the party as alt-right too. But the all key members mainly supporting left ideologies, such as anti-capitalism and christian socialism. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 02:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * IP editor, your random YouTube source is far from credible. I highly suggest you read through WP:RS. Adequate is known for its right-wing, conservative, and extremist views. All the sources in this article highlight that the party is conservative in ideology and right leaning on the political spectrum. Not a single legitimate source mentions otherwise. The parties leader has also confirmed that Alternative for Germany (another far-right party) is Adequate's main ally ...a statement that no left leaning party would ever claim. There is also sufficient evidence within the sources that show the party is connected with the right leaning Republican Party of Armenia, as well as, with right leaning Russian media outlets. The party has also conducted an interview with Free West Media, an outlet directly controlled by the far-right Sweden Democrats Party. Again, no left leaning party would ever agree to such an interview. Archives908 (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And have you ever thought for a second that the reason why so many sources talk about the party from a "negative" perspective is because the party has done/claimed some pretty extreme things? From threatening physical violence to elected officials to claiming that the LGBTQ community should be "isolated and treated as schizophrenics" aren't good things. Hence, your claim that the sources provided aren't legitimate because they "talk negatively about the party" is not valid. Archives908 (talk) 03:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Artur Danielyan have not said that AfD is ally of Adekvad, it's misinformation. He stated that "Like the Alternative for Germany party, we offer an alternative in Armenia, not only political, but also cultural and civil.". In the interview to FWM Danielyan say "Although I must say that I would also disagree with the term “right” when it comes to describing our ideology." and "You could say we’re patriots with certain socialist views… It’s just that the political mainstream has for decades tried to marginalize and label us as radicals, or ultraright… No, we’re neither left nor right, we are ADEKVAD, which means that we propagate adequate solutions for real-life problems. And the preservation of our national identity is among our main problems to be solved…" . SD is not far-right it's just right party. RPA is de facto Big Tent party, not right. Many politicians are agree to interview with opposite ideology media. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 03:19, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * That "elected" officials also threatening physical violence to opposition, so why openDemocracy is not classifying them as extremist? --46.70.6.222 (talk) 03:19, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm simply going off of what the overwhelming majority of sources state, which is that the party is conservative and right leaning. In your earlier edits on this article, you wrote that the party was left-wing. Now, you are claiming that the party is not left or right. Your arguments have not been very concise nor persuasive. Furthermore, you are unable to provide a single reliable source which states the party has any connection to the left. You seem to know a lot about the parties position, which makes me inclined to believe you are pushing a certain WP:POV all while "hiding" behind an IP. Archives908 (talk) 03:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * As for the Republican Party, they are a Big-tent party that does lean right. The SD does have far-right members and views, and Danielyan has confirmed that he seeks to legitimize ultraconservative disclosure in Armenia through establishing allies with far-right groups, such as the AFD. Please read the sources carefully before you make false claims. As far as I'm convinced, the parties statements and actions definitely showcases right leaning views. Any other editors care to weigh in? Archives908 (talk) 03:55, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It also appears that an AFD member helped to set up the interview with Free West Media. Danielyan specially thanked Manuel Ochsenreiter, the editor of an AFD magazine. Now let's have a deeper look into that interview... Danielyan confirms that, "We simply are the Armenian Rightists" and "we do share a great deal of philosophical views with traditional rightists". The source does say that the party may have some socialist views (in terms of the economy and healthcare), but Danielyan never confirmed that the party is more left leaning then it is right. Archives908 (talk) 04:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If anything, the party may have certain left leaning views on some topics as mentioned above (economy and healthcare), but by and large even Danielyan has said that the core values of the party remains conservative. Just because a party believes in free health care or economic protectionism, does not mean they are automatically 100% left leaning, as you originally claimed. In fact, many conservative parties believe in free health care, it does not mean they are socialists. Archives908 (talk) 04:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't claimed that party is "not left or right", why do you manipulating? Please give a source that Danielyan said that "we are AfD allies". Since when Anti-capitalism and Egalitarianism becomes far-right (or right) ideology? And finally there is a ideology called "Syncretic politics", according to party leader, the party is "not left or right", which means Syncretic. That "majority" of English-language sources are OSF-backed media, which have conflict of interests with the party. According the party's programme, one of Adekvad's main goals is "to promote social solidarity" . Also one of party's closer allies is ARF, which does lean left. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 04:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't claimed that party is "100% left". Second, that same ARF, they are conservationist and nationalist, but I never heard that the party does leaning right. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 04:42, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you forget...your original edit on this article changed the position from right wing to left. So yes, you did claim that the party was left. As for the ARF, you did not provide a source, so that isn't verifiable. In terms of your question, have you actually read the sources I provided? Your questions above about the AFD are found in the sources, please read.
 * Like I said earlier, Danielyan may have some left leaning policies towards education and healthcare, but, Danielyan confirmed that, "We simply are the Armenian Rightists". He has never explicitly said "We are simply the Armenian Leftists". Therefore, the logical conclusion is...yes the party has some left leaning policies, but based on their conservative principles, core ideologies, and values, it is safe to say that the party leans greater to the right then the left. Archives908 (talk) 12:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you forget too... You claimed that the party have right and even far-right ideology, when mainly nowadays it's leaders have focusing on left ideologies, such as social justice. Even on the same "source" as you provided, was written about that the party except RPA, have close allies with ARF too. On that source was never provided the party's original statement where it's claiming to be allies with AfD. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 13:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I did not forget, I know I said that because it is still true. Social justice? You're joking right. The party is against immigration, against rights for minorities, against rights for the LGBTQ community...this party maintains a classic right leaning conservative stance on the majority of issues. It is not a social justice party. Quite frankly, now you are just making things up and this conversation is far from productive. Archives908 (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I've done even more research. Yet another source which highlights the party as far right . Archives908 (talk) 14:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And another media outlet labelling the party as far right . Archives908 (talk) 14:56, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * And another . Archives908 (talk) 14:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This one seems to confirm the party is extremely nationalistic....still can't find a single source talking about the parties "leftist" ambitions...Archives908 (talk) 15:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * OC Media confirms party is far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Armedia labeling the party as far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * CaucasusWatch categorizing the party as far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Aravot using the term far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Newsbreak using the term far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Civilnet confirming the party is far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Fipnews confirms the leader is far-right Archives908 (talk) 15:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So the party leader make a statement about "restoring the social justice", there is not a "joke". Furthermore there is a many anti-capitalistic and socialistic statements by party members , so again, since when anti-capitalism, egalitarianism, and socialism is considered right idealogy and your claims are true? Also the half of the sources have conflict of interests. But second half are more reliable than current sources. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 17:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * All the sources I have provided explicitly state that the party is right-wing. All of them. In my opinion, they are all reliable, but even the more respected independent news outlets talk about the party as far-right. Meanwhile, none of the 7 sources you provided state that the party is outright a socialist party. You continue to make bold statements, and still cannot provide a single source to back it up. As far as I'm concerned, your argument is null and void. The leader himself is presenting hypocritical views, he claims to be in favour of social justice but yet he also calls for the destruction of civil societies, banning NGO's, beating up LGBTQ, death threats, no rights for minorities, telling women that rape is acceptable, and so forth. Your own sources show that he does not seem to care about social justice..your sources confirms he only cares about "social justice" for straight, Armenian, men. Those are not the beliefs of any egalitarian party but they are the beliefs of most far-right parties. So, in a way, your own sources further prove my point. Archives908 (talk) 17:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If some media calls some parties as far-right, they don't become far-right. Party members have frequently criticizing capitalism, which is right ideology, and anti-capitalists "are want to replace capitalism with another type of economic system, usually some form of socialism". Also in statements the party calling socialism "underrated". So, the CPSU was social justice supporter too, and had mainly conservative ideology, but it was a left-wing party. It is clear that you openly dislike the party, and even slandering the party calling that they "telling women that rape is acceptable", if it's true, then give the original statement. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 21:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not wise to make assumptions. I create dozens of articles about various political parties, from left wing, centrist, to right wing. I create/edit as neutral as possible by relying on sourced information, and this article is no different. Every single media outlet I have come across has called this party far right. Others, like the ones you provided, touch base on their views of health care and education, but not a single source has explicitly called this party a far left party. One of the sources I provided above, discussed the leader mocking women and saying that "women want to get raped". If I was biased about the party, I would have not created this article to begin with. Again, don't be so quick to jump to conclusions. I have reviewed your sources and if your points were valid, I would admit my mistakes. However, after conducting an extensive google search today, and reviewing both our sources in great detail, I have concluded 3 things. Number 1, every single media outlet regards this party as far right. Number 2, some of your articles do discuss certain principles the party has being left wing (in particular, their stance on health care and education). And number 3, not a single source claimed that the party was a left wing party. Therefore, logic dictates, that we as unbiased editors should proceed with what the majority of sources say. In this case, the majority of the core beliefs and ideologies are more conservative and they do have more similarities with other far right parties, then far left parties. Not to mention, that the leader himself has called his party an "Armenian Rightist" party. He has never called his party an "Armenian Leftist" party. Yes, they may have some leftist views, but, based on the overwhelming majority of sources, based on the leaders statements, and based on the core principles of the party, it is clear that the party is indeed right leaning. Archives908 (talk) 21:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So, the party leader said that the party, to be simplify, belongs to right ideology with Armenian elements, and disagrees "with the term "right" when it comes to describing our ideology", but also addicted "No, we’re neither left nor right, we are ADEKVAD", also "You could say we’re patriots with certain socialist views…". That means that the party fiscally belongs to left ideology at all, but politically belongs to right ideology. It's called Syncretic politics, just like The Other Russia of E. V. Limonov, to this party, by the way, Adekvad's leader gives interview . You never provide the original (in Armenian) source where the leader "mocking women", I think that it's just a lie. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 08:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Nope, not a lie. It's all been provided in the sources above. Clearly, you have not been reading anything I have provided. In fact, the same source mentions the leader even drove to a village to hold a party after a homophobic attack took place. You can see the picture of party members celebrating. Nothing "egalitarian" or "social justice" about that. I am familiar with Syncretic politics. However, the party isn't split equally between left and right in this regards, as most of its social policies are far more conservative. They only "lean" left on healthcare and education...not enough to make this a "Syncretic party" by any standard. It's time to face the facts, the overwhelming amount of sources state that the party is far right, the party's leader confirmed the party is rightist, and not a single source concludes that the party is left wing. So the logical conclusion is, while they have few left leaning stances, the party is undeniably rightist. Archives908 (talk) 12:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Have you not provided the original text where he mocking women and said that "rape is acceptable". Officially the party calling for restoration of social justice, no matter what do you mean for social justice. So, like the ARF, the party advocates socialism. Party is advocating planned economy, anti-capitalism and anti-globalization too, that makes that the party belongs to fiscally far-left ideology. And because of Danielyan claimed also that the party is neither left nor right, this logically means syncretism too. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 13:53, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Pictures don't lie, all you have to do is look. Danielyan explicitly said "We are an Armenian Rightist" party. That claim is backed up by every single source. Danielyan never said the party is leftist and not a single source does either. You need to stop making unsourced claims and pushing a false WP:POV. They are a rightist party with very few left leaning views...far, far, far from being considered a truly syncretic party. Archives908 (talk) 16:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So, as you don't provided any source about his original statement, I can say that it's completely a lie, because no one said about a some picture. Again, anti-capitalism and planned economy is not considered as an right ideology and de facto Adekvad supports left-wing anti-globalization too. 70% of your sources have conflict of interests with the party and can't be a reliable source. Again, the party have fully left fiscal ideology and officially supports social justice. And you never provided any source where the party supports capitalism or class discrimination. That means half of party ideology is left, so it's syncretic party. --46.70.6.222 (talk) 17:27, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Provide one source that the party is 100% syncretic. Good luck finding that. After the violent attacks against LGBT activists in the village of Shurnukh, Artur and his fellow Adekvad members visited the site to mock the victims...a tactic very common among far-right groups . In addition to being homophobic, Artur is blatantly misogynistic. In a Facebook post, Artur responded to the movement by stating that "women actually fantasize about rape and that, if anything, they receive pleasure from it". Furthermore, you seem to be forgetting that Civilnet, Fipnews, YerevanToday, Panorama, Armedia, and Republica all recognize the party as far right. As per WP:RS, every reliable source categorizes the party as right-wing and this article should and does reflect that. Archives908 (talk) 18:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * So, let's get started from what he meant. So, I already knew how some organizations speculating his posts. But unlike EqualityArmenia, the openDemocracy provided the original source of his two posts . So he talking about Istanbul Convention, says that some people receiving grants to propagate against violence from which countries, where rape statistics many times are worse than in Armenia. And now the original (not speculated) quote, "There is a statistics, which is about number of women, whose fantasizing about violence and whose receiving a pleasure during the rape, but let me not write about it. I'm not in the mood...". The second post is just a joke, "If you can't intellectually, psychologically and physically rape a woman, she will find someone who can do it... or will continue the search (at least in her fantasies).". I think it is even funny joke. What comes to the party, there is not a such term "100% syncretic", the party or syncretic or not, so here is sources, claiming that the party is fiscally belongs to left ideology as provided me. We can call it Third Position or whatever, but I think that call the party as right or far-right will be very simple and will not show party's economic policy. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 10:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure how you would you know what he meant... that seems increasingly evident that you may be connected to the leader/party if you can miraculously know what his thoughts/actions meant. Your objectivity on this topic is questionable. You are an IP hoper that began making changes 1 day after the article was created and based on your last comment, you think that rape jokes are funny, which quite frankly, is deeply disturbing. Disturbances of your crude comments aside- I agree with you and believe its best to include information about the party's Left/Syncretic/Third way beliefs on certain topics (economy, health care, education) in the "ideology section". I will utilize the most verifiable of the sources you provided above. However, the political position will remain the same, as that is still what the vast majority of sources conclude. But I will add content about the party's planned economy/anti-capitalist/etc... views in the appropriate sections. I do believe that this is a balanced and fair compromise. I will be WP:BOLD and make the necessary adjustments in order to finally finalize this discussion. Archives908 (talk) 04:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I provided the original statement, in contrast of you, where he was talked about the rape statistics, but you never provided the original post. So about the joke just a one question, so what means "intellectually rape"? If you don't know, there is a condition called Stockholm syndrome, and other syndromes. About the connection, it is clear that you are connected with OSF, because you always citing OSF-backed media, and the rhetorics, saying that the party leader insulting the woman or he is misogynistic. But I can talk about the Union for National Self-Determination party's ideology, or about Armenian Communist Party, or whatever Armenian party, without speculating and citing these media, who has conflict of interest with the party clearly. The fair compromise i think should be to mention both (left or right wings) in the infobox as National Bolshevik Party. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 07:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Nope. The party only has a few left wing views about the economy and health care and that is already discussed in the ideology section well enough. There is not even one source that calls the party left-wing, therefore, you cannot make that claim. Archives908 (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Socialist ideology is left, the party is extremely oppose to capitalism, and advocates the planned economy, so this is enough to claim that party have fiscally left ideology. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 13:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, it's not enough to say that the entire party is left wing. You need sources. It's left wing views about the economy is already discussed in the article. Archives908 (talk) 13:43, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The parties can divide on position with reactionary right-wing cultural views and radical left-wing economic views, see Third Position. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 13:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * In that case, that's fine. I was under the impression that you wanted to list the party as just a far left party. However, upon review of the National Bolshevik Party, I think that will work here too. I made the change. Archives908 (talk) 14:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Stop your disruptive editing tactics. The homophobic attack is well documented by neutral sources. If you continue removing sourced information, it will warrant Admin intervention. Archives908 (talk) 14:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Watch this, there is reason and phrase, by Alen Simonyan, why the incident started. And Artur Danielyan confirmed that he said that. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 14:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The majority of sources from neutral media all state that it was a homophobic attack. If you remove the sourced information again, you will violate WP:3RR and I will have to report both your IPs to the Admins. Archives908 (talk) 14:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * So, majority of sources claiming opposide (,, , , , , , and the full story ). Report how much you want. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 14:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Nice try, but that's not a majority of sources. It's the same video. Archives908 (talk) 14:36, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * But what if I say that both conflict sides confirmed that phrase? --46.71.217.15 (talk) 14:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * But it's not up to you to decide, we have to rely on what sources say. Even Zartonk media and Asbarez reported the case as a homophobic attack. Archives908 (talk) 14:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This source confirms that Danielyan insulted Simonyan and his parents. Also in the page was written not about attack, but about slurs. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 14:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That only talks about the details of the incident. That does not mean the other sources I provided are wrong. Archives908 (talk) 15:06, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, in the article talking about slurs, but slurs are about Alen's parent and him. Again, in the Aravot, there is prehistory about a article, published during Four-day War where Alen's Araratnews spread statement of Azerbaijani Ministry of Defence, Artur asked Alen to delete that article, but Alen refused to delete. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * All three sources I provided explicitly state that Artur shouted derogatory sexual slurs to Alen. Three independent sources can't all be wrong. Archives908 (talk) 15:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, sexual slurs, but not that. I just don't want to write here, just watch this article, and Simonyan says which slur. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 15:57, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand that, and I've already watched the video. That doesn't change the fact that the other news sources still mention homophobic remarks. Archives908 (talk) 16:17, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, sluts isn't connected to that, it's just offensive (or sexual slut). I think just need to mention about prehistory of conflict of these both. But again, that sources can be speculation or misinformation. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 16:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Who are you to determine and judge that? You are not a news outlet and you are not a legitimate source. So, you have zero authority to decide what is true or false, what is speculation or not. It is not up to you to decide that. As editors here to build this encyclopedia, we must trust and use reliable sources. And what we do know is that several unconnected media outlets in Armenia reported the same information, that the incident did result due to derogatory remarks made by Artur against Alen. I don't think there's anything wrong with including that here since it is backed by several sources. Not sure why you are so opposed to including that information? You must try and put your personal biases and connections to the party aside and edit objectively. Archives908 (talk) 17:37, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Than who are you? If the same organizations who creating the articles sponsoring you, that does not making that articles objective. I know that you aiming to provoke me as far you can. All Armenian news medias, such as panorama.am, armeniasputnik.am, newshub.am, tert.am, aravot.am, news.am, azatutyun.am, never published that the slut is homophobic, no one. That media which you like, the EqualityArmenia, refers it's article from Zartonk Media, where never talked about homophobia and confirmed that the conflict started when Danielyan used sexual blasphemy. If Armenian medias reported about homophobic slurs, than why are you not providing here? Firstly edit objectively you! If I'm not objective then why I provided Allen's statement, where he saying what Arthur said? I could just provide what Artur says about this incident. Unlike you, I searching on all medias, no matter the political, social, or whatever ideology. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 20:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I am a diligent Wikipedia editor who edits based on sourced information. Unlike you, an IP hoper pushing a blatantly obvious WP:POV. Unlike you, I am indifferent to the positions of any of the political parties I create or edit on, I try to be as neutral as possible and open to constructive critique. I base my edits on sourced information and that is exactly what I have done here. You should refrain from making this discussion personal, because it is not. Talk pages are meant for debate and discussions. I have been more than cordial in this discussion, so I'm sorry you feel that you are being "provoked". If anything, you are the one demonstrating unwarranted aggression. So, let's stick to the topic and engage in fruitful discussion that helps to build this encyclopedia. I have provided 4 sources from independent news outlets included Azatutyun, Zartonk, Ardar, and Asbarez. All 4 sources mention the attack as stemming from verbal abuse from Artur directed to Alen, and all 4 state that the comments were of a sexual/homophobic nature. They all can't be lying. Why would they make that up? Therefore, the claim is more than verifiable and should remain. Archives908 (talk) 20:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is very neutral that you see no differences between words sexual and homophobic, from these four only Asbarez classified the insults as homophobic. No, no, no words like "who you are to determinate which sources are legitimate" are discussing personality. There is many sexual insults, and in almost all Armenian medias was written which exactly about. What comes to aggression, all can see who does it. --46.71.217.15 (talk) 22:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)