Talk:National Party (Ireland, 2016)

The National Party aren't Far Right. They're certainly right wing, but if anything just an extremely conservative party.
The @claims of NP being far right usually come from the fact Justin Barret attended far right meetings in Europe, ON BEHALF of a pro-life organisation, it doesn't necessarily mean that the parties meeting he attended reflects his own views, another thing is, people may bring a comment he made on muslim people, which he actually recanted thus, how is it of any importance? The National Party DESCRIBE themselves as nationalist, not ultra nationalist, not white nationalist, no far right term, just as nationalist. As a member I know that the party is a conservative party, it isn't any of this BS. Anyone trying to claim it as "far-right" are either uneducated or want to try make the party look bad. Tim121212 (talk) 14:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Pardon me, I am a disinterested recent changes patroller. As a self-declared member of the party, you clearly have a conflict of interest and should be proposing changes here rather than editing the article directly. Relying on what the party says about itself goes against WP:PRIMARY; if they declared themselves centrist, Wikipedia would still rely on secondary sources rather than the party itself.  –Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:24, 3 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Read WP:PRIMARY and WP:RS (and, while you're here, read the discussions above, too - it would save us all a lot of time). We go by what reliable secondary sources say about the subject, not what the subject says about themselves. Doing the latter would be dumb. The Irish Times, Irish Independent, Examiner, Journal, and Irish Central all describe the NP as far-right. They are all reliable secondary sources. Sorry to break it to you, but a party that protests outside asylum-seekers' accommodation and has depictions of nooses at its protests isn't "just right-wing and conservative." Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Supporting death penalty doesn't equal far right, and you're making the protests sound bad when they're not, but I'm not really bothered debating as i know that it won't change Tim121212 (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The person they were protesting with their nooses has not committed any crime, been charged with any crime, or been convicted of any crime, let along a capital one. We both know exactly what they were doing, and why. And it has nothing to do with the death penalty. The protests "aren't bad"? Maybe not if you're the one outside, shouting in. If you were in your accommodation, with the protestors outside, you might think otherwise. You're not bothered debating as you don't have a leg to stand on. Jog on. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:01, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Whatever about the death penalty, having a leader who quotes Hitler certainly makes a party far-right. Indeed there may even be a case for adding neo-Nazism to its ideology based on that fact alone. YoungIreland (talk) 14:04, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The principles of the NP aren't inherently far right, the new leader isn't either, please look into it. Tim121212 (talk) 21:55, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. In terms of:
 * WP:VER, Wikipedia reflects the reliable/verifiable sources. Multiple such sources, including a recent one referenced by a user who implied that they were a member of the party in this edit, describe the org as "far-right".
 * WP:COI, Wikipedia editors are expected to follow the related policies. As you have already declared a connection to the subject, please propose changes on this talk page, and do not add images or text (as here and as implied in your edit summary) to promote or advocate for a subject. Please also consider adding " " to your user page.
 * Thanks. Guliolopez (talk) 00:04, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Please do not remove the Local Elections section
This section is allowed as the electoral commission has allowed Reynolds faction run in elections under the National Party banner. Removing the section of these candidates it not providing clear information to the public about the National Party, I don't understand how people are removing it. Tim121212 (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)


 * No party gets to list all of its local election candidates. Why should the National Party differ? Do you have a WP:COI you need to declare? As mentioned by, you need to get consensus for your edits - don't just revert; discuss! The WP:ONUS is on you to get consensus. You won't get consensus to include a list of candidates or set out "eleven principles" in full. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:20, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 1: This section is allowed as the electoral commission has allowed Reynolds faction run in elections under the National Party banner. It is not "allowed", there's nothing in Wiki policy that directly allows this. We don't include any party's list of election candidates per WP:NOTDIRECTORY.
 * 2: Copy and pasting a party's policy points from their website is a copyright violation and also WP:UNDUE.
 * 3: Much of the content you've added outside of this section has been based on YouTube videos, which is not a reliable source. See WP:RS.
 * 4: "Please do not remove" is attempted WP:OWNership of the article and does not fly here.
 * I see no reason to include any of this. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 15:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You see no reason to include recent events regarding the National Party? I'd like to know also why the images should be removed also? It also isn't copyright, do you want to get into why it isnt? I am giving an unbiassed look of things, i am a member of the national party and i know for a fact i got permission to copy and paste the parties principles, i have not been biassed even as being a member and I am simply adding on more recent information. Tell me, why has the area about them attending a recent protest with the image of it and also a sticker used by the NP been removed?


 * Let me add on, removing images showcasing things about the party is not fair. Them recently attending an immigration rally where a member spoke to a large crowd, with a picture of them being in the news, is a fair enough thing to add to their wikipedia page. I am questioning if you simply want to make them look bad? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim121212 (talk • contribs)


 * Hi. RE: "I am questioning if you simply want to make them look bad?". If you haven't yet read the WP:COI guidelines, then please do. One of the related issues with COI editing is that, when an editor with a COI adds uncited, non-neutral and potentially promotional content then they may not be fully self-aware that that is what they have done. And, when an other editor removes it, the COI editor may presume that the removal is based on a "counter" bias. That is not the case. The related content has been removed because it is not compliant with the policies of this project. Including WP:NPOV policies. Not because anyone wants to "make them look bad". In any event, how would an edit like this or this make the subject "look bad"? In any way? (If you think removing a WP:NOTWEBHOST/WP:NOTPROMO/WP:NOTDIRECTORY list of party members makes the subject "look bad", then you need to take a look at your editing motivations.) Guliolopez (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I agree 100% with Guliolopez. And on the subject of images, the Social Democrats have six members of the Oireachtas, and 22 councillors. Their article has a gallery box with images of their Oireachtas members, that's it. The Green Party has 17 members of the Oireachtas, 45 councillors and 2 MEPs. Their article has three images, total, not counting photos of leaders. The Labour Party - which is the oldest party in the state, at 112 years old! - has 12 images on its article (not counting photos of recent leaders). They have 12 members of the Oireachtas and 55 councillors. Fianna Fáil - four images. Fine Gael - one image that isn't logos or leaders! The National Party has zero members of the Oireachtas and zero councillors, yet has four images in its article (not counting the photo of Barrett). I don't think you're being that hard done by! Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
 * If I cannot edit, can someone please tell me how I can make reccomendations because i am not biassed Tim121212 (talk) 23:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, you're clearly biased, a member of the party, and the Reynolds faction. You can make edit requests in the form "Change X wording to Y wording" or "Add this text" (with references) in new sections, and they'll be examined. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 23:20, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not being biased. Tim121212 (talk) 09:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. But you do have a WP:COI. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:27, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

COI tag (May 2024)
At least one recent editor of this article has admitted to being a party member. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi. Per related ed summ, I've removed the main/article space tag. That tag is a "cleanup" tag. Highlighting that article cleanup is (currently) required. It is not an advisory tag. Highlighting that COI edits have (previously) occurred.
 * If a confirmed COI editor has edited the page, then the related (advisory) tag goes on the Talk page. As I had already done.
 * Just because "one recent editor has admitted to [having a COI]", doesn't mean the entire article needs cleanup(?) Especially when the COI edits have already been reviewed/addressed/removed/tempered as needed.
 * If any issues remain (which?) they can be addressed directly. Is there an article-level cleanup issue currently? Or was that tag added simply as an advisory? Guliolopez (talk) 00:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Just an advisory, no problem with the removal. I added it as I was expecting further edits from the editor in question or others similarly involved, but the page protection should prevent that. I agree, it wasn't the best of tags to use. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 10:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Election promo
Friendly request to stop with adding election promo. We are writing a neutral encyclopedia, not an election flyer. The Banner talk 19:26, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * At this point we're reaching WP:IDHT territory with the constant no-summary reverts. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 19:40, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This is not relevant anymore as the 2024 Irish local elections are over. Any information on the party's platform is purely for informational purposes only. Besides, the party platform is already explained, even if in a disorderly manner, under the ideology and policies section. I do not understand why an orderly description keeps getting deleted. HorCrux48 (talk) 21:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Promo. And not sourced with independent sources. The Banner  talk 22:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * RE: "I do not understand why an orderly description keeps getting deleted". Please take the time to read the guidelines linked in the related edit summaries. Including WP:NOTPROMO, WP:NOTMISSION, WP:NOTMIRROR and WP:COPYVIO. Wikipedia is not a republisher or mirror for (copyrighted) content of that type. Whether its "orderly" or not doesn't come into it. Guliolopez (talk) 16:11, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Party slogan translation
The party's slogan, 'Ar dheis ar aghaidh!' is given the translation as 'Forward and to the right!' I feel that this doesn't correctly capture the intention of the statement, and may seem confusing to readers who don't speak English. I understand that translations can often fail to fully grasp the meaning of the original, but even so I think the translation here can be improved. As a side note before getting into translations of the above - does the party not also use the slogan "Right so far"?

So, 'ar aghaidh' has multiple meanings, and I think several of the alternatives better suit the intention here.
 * 'Onward to the right!'
 * 'Advance to the right!'
 * 'On to the right!'
 * Even 'Forward to the right!' fits better than "Forward and", given the lack of a conjunction in the Irish.

Any thoughts? Xx78900 (talk) 09:24, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence they still use that slogan? If not, then it should be removed. Spleodrach (talk) 10:06, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to move page
I propose that the page currently titled "National Party (Ireland, 2016)" be moved to a more appropriate title, such as "National Party (Ireland)" or "National Party (political party)".

Rationale for the Move:

The current title, "National Party (Ireland, 2016)," suggests a temporary or defunct political grouping specific to the year 2016, rather than an active political entity. This is misleading as it does not accurately reflect the ongoing activity. HorCrux48 (talk) 20:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Comment. While I partially agree with the nominator's position (that the "2016" suffix is a less-than-ideal disambiguator), neither of the proposed titles account for the fact that there have been other parties (in Ireland and elsewhere) called the National Party. If the nominator is proposing National Party (Ireland), then the nominator needs to justify/support an assertion that the "current" party of this name is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC among other/former such Irish parties. If the nominator is proposing National Party (political party), then the nominator needs to justify/explain how the Irish party is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC relative to all other such parties globally. Guliolopez (talk) 21:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Deputy leader
If the leader of the party is disputed, then surely the deputy leader is too? The naming of Patrick Quinlan as the deputy leader in the infobox should have a footnote stating he is deputy to James Reynolds, not Justin Barrett. If Barrett's deputy is not known, that should be stated too. It would also be desirable to have an independent source, rather than the NP website. 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:1591:E40F:72E3:CE69 (talk) 15:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Fair point. I've added the (Reynolds Faction) bit per the leader part above. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 15:43, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 June 2024
In the History section, please add the following: "Following his defeat in the 2024 European election, James Reynolds stated that he would never run under the National Party banner again, because "the National Party brand is a toxic brand."" 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:1591:E40F:72E3:CE69 (talk) 15:24, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 15:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for adding that, but could I ask you you to move the content from the Elections section to the bottom of the 2023 allegations of theft and leadership dispute section? Reynolds' comments have nothing to do with the election per se, and everything to do with the ongoing strife in the party. 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:19B6:E3C6:56BE:3781 (talk) 15:21, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, I'll move it down there so. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 15:23, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks. 2001:BB6:47ED:FA58:19B6:E3C6:56BE:3781 (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Political POV-pushing
Could we discuss the edits which have been reversed by The Banner. I don't see how they're political POV pushing. I explained my rationale in the edit histories. In addition to naming a person who has not yet been named elsewhere on the page, and who is not named in any third party source, the current sentence is just poorly worded gramatically. Discuss. Mikebarrett0 (talk) 11:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I have reverted it because it was both unsourced and not neutral. The Banner  talk 13:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Mikebarrett0 removed the surname 'Conroy', which isn't mentioned anywhere else in the article. Who is this 'Conroy'? We shouldn't have to click through to (Justin) Barrett's blog to find out. The removal was therefore correct, given that the name by itself has zero context. The version you reverted to now reads (my emphasis), which is ungrammatical. There is nothing 'not neutral' about leaving out the name of someone who is not mentioned anywhere else? Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 22:56, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * What I also removed was  The Banner  talk</i> 23:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Yes, you removed that at 11:47 yesterday - correctly, IMO. Mikebarrett0 made two subsequent edits, 1) removing the Conroy name, and 2) correcting the grammatical error - also both correct. He did not reinstate the claim about Patrick Quinlan. You reverted those two changes at 12:48 - incorrectly. You should self-revert that last edit. <span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I can not do that due to the protection, but I would be willing. The Banner  <i style="color:maroon">talk</i> 21:32, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Done now, cheers, <span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Addition to leadership dispute section
I propose making the following addition to the leadership dispute section when restrictions are lifted:

As of April 2024, the leadership was still in dispute, with competing submissions being made to the Electoral Commission. Both factions ran candidates in the June 2024 European elections, with two candidates each running in the Dublin and Midlands-Northwest constituencies. Both Barrett and Reynolds ran unsuccessfully in the latter constituency. One councillor, Patrick Quinlan, was elected to Fingal County Council in the in local elections. <span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me - though did the Barrett faction run anyone in the locals? I thought they only ran the two Barretts in Dublin and MNW. ser! (chat to me - see my edits) 11:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Good point. I've edited the proposed addition accordingly. <span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 11:56, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * And done. <span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)