Talk:Popular Unity Candidacy

Representation?
That I know, they haven't reached representation so far. Please feel to amend if necessary. Mountolive 02:14, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Amended. Removed comparison. Would you include in Izquierda Unida that they are more left and, most sectors I would dare say, less Spanish nationalists than PSOE? Toniher 10:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry about the representation thing: I did a quick search in their webpage but, for sure, I could have done a better one, since I wasn't sure myself I posted the above comment.


 * However some of them actually from town independent coalition is an obscure statement and should be clarified. I guess it means that they are a part of local lists, in which case the info is quite misleading. Can you confirm this extent?


 * I understand your reasons for removing the comparison. The thing is that -or so I am guessing- the IU entry states clearly in the definition what kind of political principles they have and no comparasion is necessary, however, this entry does not define those principles, (because just saying "left-wing" is quite vague in this context, don't you think?) that is why I used the "short cut" of comparing to ERC, which I agree is not the best way. You may want to edit explaining further their political principles.


 * Mountolive 18:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo cup.png
Image:Logo cup.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Move
Candidature seems like a mistranslation from Catalan and wouldn't be used in English so the article should probably be moved to Popular Unity Candidates. Valenciano (talk) 20:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Agree. I dont think no one will object: please proceed if you may, Valenciano. Mountolive   group using a loop of another pop group 14:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I object, however; a candidate is an individual seeking election. "Popular Unity Candidates" implies that each candidate is independent, but that they're together for convenience' sake. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Catalan does not have that connotation. A more accurate translation—assuming that 'candidacy' is out—would be 'slate' or even 'ticket'. Q·L·1968 ☿ 05:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

'3rd party Citation needed' - why?
I'd like to query the need for 3rd party sources when describing formal positions of a political party/group. Surely when a statement refers to party policy, the party manifesto is an entirely legitimate source. Why would a 3rd party source be needed?

Changes I refer to: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Popular_Unity_Candidacy&type=revision&diff=690310377&oldid=689514250 - made by RJFF.

Tomclarke (talk) 16:04, 11 December 2015 (UTC)


 * No, party positions should always be described according to reliable, secondary sources. This is applied to each and every article, we don't make exceptions. If these positions are addressed in secondary sources is also an indicator for relevance. If these positions of CUP's are never discussed in secondary sources, this would suggest that they are not considered notable. Wikipedia – as an encyclopedia – is a tertiary source, it's content is generated by summarizing secondary sources, not by simply reciting primary sources. --RJFF (talk) 11:14, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Popular Unity Candidacy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121108062657/http://www.unitatpopular.cat:80/programa to http://www.unitatpopular.cat/programa
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121114233648/http://www.unitatpopular.cat:80/programa/principis-d-accio-politica to http://www.unitatpopular.cat/programa/principis-d-accio-politica
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121108060954/http://www.unitatpopular.cat:80/candidats-i-candidates/barcelona to http://www.unitatpopular.cat/candidats-i-candidates/barcelona

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:55, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Arran?
Arrian is not youth section of Popular Unity Candidacy. This party is organized in a different way to the other parties, and they do not have youth section. Anyway, Arran is part from Popular Unity Candidacy, but it's not their youth wing, so I will remove it. Happens the same with the student syndicate SEPC.

--Daniel Bond En: (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2016 (UTC)