Talk:Social Democratic Party of Germany

Scheißerpedia
The fact that one can read the entire lede and the entire "History" section without ever reading that the SPD was Marxist for the first 50 years of its existence, but isn't anymore, begs the question why? Sorry, but the phrase "Marxist-influenced" is actually worse than saying nothing at all, because it is literally meaningless without context. Fucking Christ! 76.69.155.96 (talk) 01:13, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, and not a fucking word about Rosa. Who wrote this garbage??? 76.69.155.96 (talk) 01:22, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Factions section under Ideology in infobox
Is it really necessary to list factions in the infobox? The SPD is a catch-all center-left social-democratic party&mdash;of course it will have democratic socialist and centrist factions! In the interest of concision (especially since this is the infobox), I propose that the factions section be removed from the infobox. The references should be used in the article body instead. This same issue applies to the CDU and the CSU. Ezhao02 (talk) 14:23, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The factions absolutely should be removed from the Infobox, and several of them are backed up with references of which are dubious reliability, or don't claim that they supposedly do.--Autospark (talk) 13:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have removed the section from this page. However, I don't want to do it on the CDU/CSU pages, since I'm not sure which ones to keep. Should we start a discussion on those pages? Ezhao02 (talk) 15:21, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , I agree with the removal because they should be under a Factions parameter which I am proposing to add. Since we have a section about factions on several political parties articles, I believe they should be in the infobox, not under Ideology because that would be the wrong parameter, but under a new Factions one. Since the infobox is supposed to list key facts, factions may be important enough to be listed. Of course, there would need to be a sourced section about them, etc. Otherwise we would simply leave the parameter blank and only have one main ideology under Ideology. Any thoughts?--Davide King (talk) 18:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I will respond on the CDU's talk page. Ezhao02 (talk) 19:37, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , if there is still no faction parameter, Chinese Communist Party could a good way of reflecting changes or controversy without having to use the awkward Factions or Majority/Minority. But this is not the case, and I still agree that "[t]he SPD is a catch-all center-left social-democratic party—of course it will have democratic socialist and centrist factions!" Pro-Europeanism was also added again and I had to remove it. Davide King (talk) 19:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help! I agree with the catch-all statement. Ezhao02 (talk) 13:08, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Founding date
Shouldn't 1875 (the merger of ADAV and SDAP) be the founding date instead of 1863 (the founding of ADAV), since ADAV is only one of the two predecessor organizations?

178.218.236.111 (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You could be right, but I wonder what other editors think. Ezhao02 (talk) 13:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Do you have any citations to support the merger date of ADAV and SDAP that you wish to include to support the 1875 date? Jurisdicta (talk) 05:07, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Factions
While the SPD is largely social democratic, there are some factions in the party who support the ideologies of democratic socialism and social liberalism. Should we add it? Like writing "factions"?-Karma1998 (talk) 11:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)


 * As long as there are proper sources for it, I don't see why not.
 * More than that, I think we should also add a "historical" section, as before 1918-19, it had various Communist factions as well. Genabab (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I oppose listing factions in the Infobox of any political party article, and ‘historical’ ideologies, so I strongly oppose doing so in these cases as well. I don’t object to factional ideologies being described in an Ideology, however, as long as properly referenced (as in sources which explicitly describe factions). Autospark (talk) 20:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am also opposed to listing "historical" or "factions" in the infobox considering that the purpose of the infobox is to only contain key facts, in this case its key ideology/ideologies. Parties are often associated with several ideologies/labels so it's best to keep the ideology (or in some cases multiple ideologies) that the party is mainly associated with, and in the case of SPD it's "social democracy". Vacant0 (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am also opposed to adding factional ideologies to the infobox in this particular case. The SPD is indeed overwhelmingly a social-democratic party, thus "Social democracy" is fair enough. I would remove also "pro-Europeanism", which is not an ideology per se, but a policy. --Checco (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I second. Pro-Europeanism was re-added again without discussing it previously. Vacant0 (talk) 20:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree that "factions" should not be added to the infobox: they are hard to define (do you need a organized group? recognized by the party? by the press? Some minimum size and duration? I think the Infobox should contain brief, important, and uncontroversial facts only; factions are too vague and fluid. (and I agree that "pro-Europeanism" is not something I consider an ideology.) --Qcomp (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * i think almost every social democratic party has democratic socialist and social liberal factions Braganza (talk) 11:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

(Off-topic) On pro-Europeanism and, thus, Euroscepticism, I hope we will be able achieve a consensus to remove them from all party infoboxes. --Checco (talk) 21:04, 15 January 2023 (UTC)


 * I personally would add historical ideologies if they were important like Marxism for the SPD as well as the stand towards the EU if its needed.
 * Without this UKip wouldn't be distinguishable from the British National Front for example. 2003:D2:970D:3300:5C61:C8C1:2910:ACEE (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2023 (UTC)