Talk:Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party (current)

Title
I express my opposition to the new title of the article: "Radical Party (France)" was fairly better and I remember to all that "Valoisien" has nothing official. I hope that we should come back to the previous title. --Checco 00:39, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * We're debating this on Talk:Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party. In any cases, the original title of this article was "Radical Party (Valoisien)", translated from the fr:Parti radical valoisien entry. WP:Move suggest that moves that might be the subject of some discussion be... discussed before-hand. I suggest we carry on this discussion where it was started. Tazmaniacs 01:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, to continue there. --Checco 01:47, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo parti radical.png
Image:Logo parti radical.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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:39, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move
I think that the name of this article is too long and that it should be changed. Moreover this centrist party, which is the continuation of the Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party (historical), does not use this long title (including even the word "socialist"!) any more.

I propose "Radical Party (France, current)" as new name on the example of Christian Democracy (Italy, current), but I'm open to other proposals.

Please consider that this requested move should go together with Talk:Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party (current). --Checco (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Moreover I'm considering again about having a single article on the French Radical Party as the "current" one is the direct and legal continuation of the "former". They are simply the same party. In fact Left-wing Radicals split from the Radical Party in 1972, after that Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber had been elected party leader in 1971. Servan-Schreiber continued to be leader until 1975 and actually there was no end to the "original Radical Party". --Checco (talk) 10:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

One Radical Party, two articles

 * I copy here this discussion I had with Nightstallion --Checco (talk) 13:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I proposed two requested moves about the Radical parties. "Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party" is too long as a title and also incorrect for the current Radical Party as that long title is not used any more. I'd like too know your opinion on these moves.

Moreover I'm considering again about having a single article on the French Radical Party as the "current" one is the direct and legal continuation of the "former". They are simply the same party. In fact Left-wing Radicals split from the Radical Party in 1972, after that Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber had been elected party leader in 1971. Servan-Schreiber continued to be leader until 1975 and actually there was no end to the "original Radical Party". --Checco (talk) 10:40, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I did not understand your argument, but what about the other move request? I don't think it is correct to name an article about a party with a name (Republican, Radical and Radical-Socialist Party) which that party doesn't use any more. It would be like naming that article about the Social Democratic Party of Austria "Socialist Party of Austria", as this was the name used by the party for more than fifty years! --Checco (talk) 10:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * About the second issue I brought to discussion and which I believe it is fairly more important, I think that we should consider having only one article about the French Radical Party, as it is the same party. Almost every source states that. Plese consider for example http://www.france-politique.fr/parti-radical.htm. PRG was a split from the Radical Party, but the Radical Party continued to exist, exactly as the Communist Refoundation Party continued to exist after the split of the Party of Italian Communists. --Checco (talk) 11:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Other sources support what I believe it is corret:
 * http://www.indopedia.org/Radical_Party_(France).html
 * http://www.politique.net/parti-radical-de-gauche.htm (states that PRG was born from the split of the minority faction of the Radical Party, also fr.Wiki states this)
 * http://www.partiradical.net/pages/nous-connaitre/presentation.asp (the Radical Party presents itself as the direct continuation of the 1901 Radical Party)
 * http://www.google.de/search?hl=it&q=parti+radical+de+gauche&meta= and http://www.google.de/search?hl=it&q=parti+radical+de+gauche&meta= (also PRG presents itself as a scission from the Radical Party!)
 * --Checco (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not against merging the two parties, but we should have the article at the correct name -- and as I remember, the last time we had this discussion it turned out the legal name was still RRaRSP? — Nightstallion 11:19, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Merging the two articles is definitely more urgent.
 * About the name, I see that the party is called simply "Radical Party" both in the symbol and in the website. Even if RRaRSP wold be the legal name (something I'm not sure about), I think that we should chose the simpliest name. Think about Conservative Party (UK) whose official name is "Conservative and Unionist Party", Rainbow Group (1984–1989) whose official name was "Rainbow Group: Federation of the Green Alternative European Links, Agalev-Ecolo, the Danish People's Movement against Membership of the European Community, and the European Free Alliance, in the European Parliament", Democratic Left (Italy) whose official name is "Sinistra Democratica. Per il Socialismo Europeo", Lega Nord whose official name is "Lega Nord per l'Indipendenza della Padania" and so on. Anyway I don't think that this is exactly the case. --Checco (talk) 11:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Mh. Okay, fair enough, consider me supportive of the shorter name. Now, what about the merger? The last time, some people brought some pretty good arguments why we should *not* merge -- what has changed since then? — Nightstallion 11:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Simply there was and there is no evidence or source that they are two different parties. A similar thing happened fro the Italian Democratic Socialist Party, if you remember. The fact that fr.Wiki has two separate article cannot be a reason for keeping two articles in en.Wiki. Moreover also fr.Wiki states that the "current" Radical Party is the direct and legal continuation of the "former" Radical Party... --Checco (talk) 12:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Mh. Okay, fair enough, then consider me neutral to moderately supportive on that. — Nightstallion 12:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

On the basis of this discussion I will merge the two article into one. As all the sources explain there's no evidence that the "historical" Radical Party ever ceased to exist. --Checco (talk) 13:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)