Talk:Democratic Party (Italy)/Archives/2023

Infobox
I don't think that Christian left and Social liberalism are mentioned as factions in those infobox sources (if there are any they should be added, otherwise it should say that PD has been described as Christian leftist and social liberal by sources), but I'd agree on only keeping social democracy in the infobox as this label is most commonly used and the party itself is broadly social democratic. Vacant0 (talk) 10:00, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Agree with the above.-- Autospark (talk) 13:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC)


 * As proponent (through an edit summary), I agree that "social democracy" should be the only ideology mentioned in the "ideology" camp of the infobox. "Christian left" and "social liberalism" are important ideological trends within the party, but only small minority hold those positions. --Checco (talk) 20:34, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Wait to remove the other ideologies, describing a complex party like the Democratic Party simply as social democratic would be too simplistic, the PD is not comparable to other European social democratic parties. It's probably not even correct to describe him primarily as a social democratic party, but like a progressive one.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:19, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not keen on the term "progressive" or "progressivism" myself; other than as a term that means generically centre-left. Which arguably would redundant as we have more descriptive terms there. I agree that the PD isn't on many levels a typical social-democratic party, but I'd argue that 'family' of party is more diverse and heterogeneous than is usually given credit for, and the PD's largest predecessor was a social-democratic party (itself descended from a communist party, of course, although in central-eastern Europe that's the norm for socdem parties, why PDS/DS being the single example of that in Western Europe).-- Autospark (talk) 16:02, 21 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Quite the contrary, I think that the PD is a standard social-democratic party, not particularly complex and no less diverse than British Labour and the German SPD. These latter two parties, which are arguably more heterogenous, are home to liberals, social liberals, greens, Christian leftists (or Christian socialists) and so on, but their respective infoboxes do not include factional ideologies (Labour has "social democracy" and "democratic socialism", the SPD has "social democracy" alone). Moreover, within the PD, Christian leftists and social liberals are tiny minorities, whether compared to democratic socialists and greens, which are not currently mentioned. This said, I agree with User:Autospark that social democracy "is more diverse and heterogeneous than is usually given credit for" and I oppose "progressivism", too generic and quite meaningless. --Checco (talk) 03:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Progressivism is simply my take on this party, not a real proposition. But since there are different sources on those ideologies, and since the PD is the result of the merger of parties of different ideologies, I think it is wrong to exclude the other ideologies from the infobox. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 08:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * As usual, one can find sources on several ideologies for each party. However, there is no doubt that the PD is a mainstream and quite standard social-democratic party, as well as that Christian left and social liberalism are minority ideological trends (as explained, both democratic socialism and green politics have a larger say within the party, especially under the current leadership). --Checco (talk) 12:32, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * That’s also my take at the moment. We should of course note the various factions in the article body (and briefly in the lede), but for the Infobox, social democracy is enough, I feel.-- Autospark (talk) 13:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree, for the Infobox, social democracy is enough as the main defining and widely recognized as that. Seems also to editors agree about. 178.220.255.58 (talk) 19:55, 3 July 2023 (UTC)