Talk:Lega Nord/Archive 7

Merging Lega per Salvini Premier and Lega Nord
I would like to propose the merge of the article Lega per Salvini Premier together with the Lega Nord article, and to rename the target article to Lega (Italy) or alternatively League (Italy). Some explanations below are taken from skimming through academic sources; I found a good summary in this paper: The League of Matteo Salvini (2021).

The two existing WP articles correspond to two registered parties, both officially still active in Italy. Lega Nord (LN) is the party which was formed ~30 years ago, while Lega per Salvini Premier (LpSP or Lega) was created in 2017 by LN leader Matteo Salvini, mainly for two reasons: to solve the legal problems of LN (with 49 million euros of electoral reimbursements disappeared, currently under investigation by Italian authorities) by making it a "bad company" of the real "Lega", and to make the translation from a Northern (Padanian) secessionist party to a national-level right-wing party officially on paper. Note that by 2020, all regional branches of LN were technically dissolved and re-founded as regional branches of LpSP. So, while it is true that technically (i.e. legally) the two organizations are separate entities, I argue that in reality there is no practical difference between the two in terms of current membership (there is no indication on whether MPs or MEPs are LN or LpSP members), de facto leadership (Salvini for both, while the official leader of LN (Igor Iezzi) is just a sort of a bankrupcy caretaker, and has no relevant political leadership whatsoever on the LN or Lega members), and political ideologies (LN strategy switched to "national" right after Salvini's leadership began in 2013, as Us with Salvini, the LN sister party for southern Italy, was founded in 2014 – and today the Northern part of Lega adheres to the Salvini political program, as the Federal Council of LN just confirmed ). Concerning political reality, I am arguing that Lega Nord just rebranded itself into Lega, however without officially (yet) changing name and statute (probably also in order not to lose old-style Padanian secessionists, which are the strong Lega supporters in the northern Italian regions, and would not have easily accepted a removal of the secessionist ideals from the main statute of their party). In the north, the whole LN structure was inherited by LpSP, while in the south the "new Lega" is basically on the way to copy the same structure as old LN and current northern LpSP.

Regarding not having a new article when a political party organization changes name and/or main ideology, I bring forward a few examples from other parties in WP: the French National Rally which was National Front before, the Italian Communist Party which was Communist Party of Italy before, the Italian Azione which was Siamo Europei before, the Italian Union of the Centre which was Union of Christian and Centre Democrats before, the Spanish Unidas Podemos which was Unidos Podemos before, or also The Left in the European Parliament – GUE/NGL group which was just GUE/NGL before. All of these have a single article even if their name was changed officially at some point. I also like to mention the case of the US Democratic Party, which of course did not have a change of article corresponding to its drastic change of ideology from pro-slavery to pro-civil rights decades after the Civil War.

Regarding the name of the target article, I argue that "Lega" (or "League") is the most common name – by now used in all national and international media. LpSP is not really a name but rather an electoral slogan, as it contains the current leader's name in it (as in the typical Italian centre-right electoral lists' names since the Second Republic, see Berlusconi's Forza Italia).

What I found by looking at sources for my argument, is the following:


 * The whole existence of the Lega per Salvini Premier article is based mostly on a single source: its official statute. This constitutes a violation of Wikipedia policies about No original research. A search on Google Scholar on papers published since 2017 gives only 68 results for LpSP (and 16 for the English name) versus 17 thousand for "Lega", 28 thousand for "League", 6.8 thousand for "Lega Nord", and 3.7 thousand for "Northern League".
 * In the academic papers where the full name "Lega per Salvini Premier" is used, it is typically only used at most once to define the party name, and then always "Lega" is used in the text to refer to the common organization.
 * Elections: the party went to the 2018 Italian general election as "Lega", to the 2019 European Parliament election as "Lega Salvini Premier" , and at the regional elections since 2019 alternatively as "Lega" or "Lega Salvini [region]" (see the official Italian elections archive).
 * Some more academic sources for my argument (in bold the important sentences)
 * Just FYI, the good old Nordsieck only lists one party, and calls it Lega, with both regionalism and right-wing politics as ideologies.

The current situation of the articles on Wikipedia is such that the LN article contains the whole history including the passage to national Lega and following developments (more proper of Lega than LN). On the other hand the LpSP article is a very short one. Merging the two will not amount to a lot of work. I would only suggest to have special care in mentioning the "double" legal nature of the Lega party in the very beginning of the article (see other examples mentioned before). Yakme (talk) 19:31, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Surely, we should move content from this article to the other, but that does not mean that we should have a joint article. I strongly oppose merging the two articles for the sake of clarity and historical perspective. Additionally, I think that it is always better having different articles: RPF/CNRS/UNR/UDR/RPR/UMP/LR, CDS/FD/UDF/MoDem, PCI/PDS/DS/PD, FI/PdL/FI, MSI/AN/PdL/FdI, etc. (I would also have separate articles for the French FN and RN). All these cases are different, but, for readers' sake, separate articles make history much more simple and articles more focused. --Checco (talk) 09:35, 14 November 2021 (UTC)


 * I would like to make some preliminary considerations:
 * 1) First of all, the comparison with the US Democratic Party has nothing to do with the League, because in the case of the League there are two parties legally distinct and separately registered in the Italian register of parties.
 * 2) You have made various comparisons with parties that have changed their name, but the Northern League has never really changed its name, even today it is called that. The Lega per Salvini Premier is another party that has replaced it.
 * 3) "Lega per Salvini Premier" is not just an electoral slogan (like those contained in the symbols of the lists of other parties), but the official name of the new party.
 * 4) "The good old Nordsieck" refers to 2018, when only the Northern League (under the new brand "Lega") officially ran in the election. So it's not updated.
 * 5) The whole existence of the Lega per Salvini Premier article is based mostly on a single source: its official statute: but the current page is just a stub and does not mean anything, you know this very well, it is you who did not want it to be implemented. There are many newspaper articles that explain well the transition from the Lega Nord to the Lega per Salvini Premier. Also in Google Scholar, as you have also shown, there are many papers concerning the LSP. So there is no original research. I don't understand what the comparison of the number of references has to do with the merger / separation of pages: it isobvious that terms like "Lega" or "Lega Nord" are more used than "Lega per Salvini premier", but this has nothing to do with to do with the merger / separation of the two parties, at most it concerns the name of the page.
 * 6) there is no indication on whether MPs or MEPs are LN or LpSP members This statement is only partly correct: from 2020 the only operative party is the Lega per Salvini Premier, therefore membership in the Northern League de facto no longer has any relevance. Probably only Bossi does not have a LSP membership card.


 * Conclusion: The sources clearly state that we are talking about two different parties (a bad company and an operational party), only the political area is the same: in all cases where the parties have evolved into something else (PCI/PDS/DS, MSI/AN, DC/PPI) we have separate pages. We even have two separate pages for Forza Italia (when in reality the party is the same one born in 1994).
 * For all these reasons, I think the best solution is to describe the two legally distinct parties in two separate pages: in the case of a merged page, where do we indicate the current offices of the Northern League? The current infobox is wrong, so it is not the solution. An eventual merged page should be called "League (Italy)", because a title like "Lega (Italy)" would not make sense (the Italian name was kept for reasons of natural disambiguation). And above all, if these two pages were merged, the application of the same principle could not be excluded in other cases of substantially equal parties, such as Forza Italia.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 17:33, 16 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Why do you have to be so accusatory and somehow aggressive in your replies? I really put everything very neatly and politely here, and I am just proposing a merge, I am not proposing to kill anyone.
 * Anyway, I do not see any sources given in your (and Checco's) replies. You are just stating facts, without proof. Also in Google Scholar, as you have also shown, there are many papers concerning the LSP Yes, and these sources, which I reported, clearly explicitly state that there is no distinction between the two organizations: whenever an academic paper mentions the name "Lega per Salvini Premier", they immediately say that in the article they will refer to LpSP and LN both as "Lega", since they are one the continuation of the other. This is what academics write. Probably only Bossi does not have a LSP membership card Source for this information?
 * Finally on your "conclusion": The sources clearly state that we are talking about two different parties Again, which sources? You are not pointing to any real specific source. Of course they are two legally different entities, but they are de facto the same party with an evolution in terms of official name and structure. the application of the same principle could not be excluded in other cases of substantially equal parties and so what? I do not see the problem, since WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. --Yakme (talk) 18:48, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It was not my intention to have an accusatory/aggressive tone. Why are you asking me for a source for a sentence I started with "probably"? It is as if I were asking you the sources for your claim "probably also in order not to lose old-style Padanian secessionists, which are the strong Lega supporters in the northern Italian regions, and would not have easily accepted a removal of the secessionist ideals from the main statute of their party". You mention WP: OTHERSTUFFEXISTS when you were the first to make comparisons with other parties (which, unlike the League, have really changed their name).
 * The sources refer to the LSP as the League: so what? It's just a matter of names. LSP and LN are one the continuation of the other: of course, such as PDS was the continuation of PCI, AN the continuation of MSI, PPI the continuation of DC or AP the continuation of NCD (not to mention Forza Italia). Furthermore, here we are talking about two parties that coexist, so the continuation is merely political since they are really two distinct parties (therefore more than the cases just mentioned). How do you claim that there are no sources? There are so many that explain how there are an old League and a new League (,, , , , etc.). I don't understand why to make it seem like they are the same party...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I would like to stress that I have brought published academic sources written by political scientists (in which LN and LpSP are treated as a single political entity, and indeed authors actually explicitly confirm that they refer to both organizations as one "Lega" or "League"), while you brought newspapers and blogs, an op-ed by a political scientist (very different from a published paper in a scientific journal) and a book. But in any case, I agree with most of what is written in your sources: I am not arguing that the two parties do not exist. I am arguing that as far as the Wikipedia article is concerned, i.e. as far as public knowledge and common sense are concerned, the two organizations are the same political entity, and there is no difference de facto between LN and LpSP in how the whole world sees them (except for the Italian fiscal agency probably). Therefore, one article is enough, and is helpful to the readers.
 * Anyway, thanks for intervening. I also hope that other editors would comment on this, it would be nice to have an "external opinion" (on either side). --Yakme (talk) 23:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * I support a two-article solution, as the status quo (albeit with expansion of the article on LpSP, and treating that as the 'default' article on Lega). I come to this conclusion primarily out of the precedents mentioned by Checco and Scia Della Cometa of creating new, separate articles for political parties once they have had significant organisation and/or ideological change; in the case of Lega Nord, we have seen an established separatist/regionalist party of northern Italy reorganise itself as an all-Italy conservative populist party.--Autospark (talk) 14:10, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Yakme: Almost a month has passed, at the end of the discussion a decision will have to be made. It seems to me that the proposal to merge the pages has not garnered support, so the topics should be divided into two pages ...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 10:52, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Sure! First of all, the template of this article should have Salvini as leader, Iezzi as federal commissioner and Bossi as federal president. --Checco (talk) 11:42, 12 December 2021 (UTC)