Talk:Sumar (electoral platform)

Translation from "Sumar"
So, I would like to discuss how here 'Sumar' has been translated as "Unite". In my opinion, translating it into 'add up' perfectly matches the purpose of the word in Spanish, especially considering the logo itself contains a plus sign. On the other hand, the translation 'Unite' also fits considering the idea of the platform, that is to unite different left-wing tendencies.

For this reason I consider it appropiate to add both translations e.g (English:'Unite' or 'add up') to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpamCanEnjoyer (talk • contribs) 11:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * A Spanish word may be translated into multiple forms in English, but that does not mean those English translations are equivalent to each other. It's very obvious the meaning of "sumar" is not the mathematical operation/calculation in this context. You yourself describe it very well: the idea of the platform is to unite different left-wing tendencies, so "Unite" fits that meaning well. "Sumar" conveys both meanings in Spanish (the mathematical one and the unification one), but "Unite" does not mean the same as "Add up" in English, even if both of them are correct translations of Sumar in Spanish.  Impru 20 talk 14:01, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

"Progressive" is a term used by left-wing parties themselves....
and clearly not an objective terminology. If you dont call the right "patriotic" and smear them as "far-right" instead please use the same rules for the left side of the political aisle otherwise you become a partisan hack. 80.131.51.8 (talk) 18:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Electoral platform?
What about "coalition" instead of "electoral platform"? -- Checco (talk) 18:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * That sounds better. David O. Johnson (talk) 05:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Syncretic / transversal
Some users keep deleting this section that I wrote with no explanation why lol

I'm fine with the edits that I made to the article itself & which I discussed in this section I wrote being removed for the time being, there're clearly some detractors to my proposal of adding "syncretic" and/or "transversal" to Sumar's political position in this article, so it is probably for the best to refrain for now from adding those edits & instead wait and see whether my proposal gains traction here in the talk page or not, but for that to even be a possibility this section I wrote has to stay here & not be deleted lol being fine for the time being with people removing the polemic & controversial edits that I unilaterally made to the article itself is one thing, but people directly removing from the discussion the points, insights & proposals that I raised & the info that I gathered in support of them is a whole different story, and, unless an admin or some other Wikipedia authority decides that for some unforeseen reason this has to be deleted, I have no intention of letting that happen, if I see that this section has been deleted again I'll simply post it back, as easy as that, I find edit wars very petty, middle school-like, tedious & unlike how sensible people behave, but it really doesn't cost me any effort whatsoever to post this back if I see it's been deleted again, so if that's what it takes in order for the points, insights & proposals I raised to merely stay in the discussion I'm down.

Ok, now onto the actual topic lol:

As I said in the "none of the sources in the infobox follow WP standards" thread, I believe that if "centre-left" is removed from Sumar's "political position" section (and I have nothing against removing it, imo whoever added it was definitely reaching), something else should be added to the section instead, since "left-wing to far-left" on its own definitely doesn't do justice to the coalition's political position nor to the way its political position is characterized in the Spanish media (to be clear, I don't advocate for removing "far-left" from the section, it is indeed well sourced so it should be there, and Sumar is indeed characterized as far-left by some Spanish news media outlets, what I'm saying is that "left-wing to far-left" on its own definitely doesn't do justice to the coalition political position nor to the way its political position is characterized in the Spanish media).

So I've decided to add "syncretic / transversal" too to the "political position" section. The "transversal" characterization of Sumar & her leader, Yolanda Díaz, by the Spanish media is very widespread, and I've provided what I think is more than enough sourcing to prove it here:

https://www.psa.ac.uk/psa/news/after-podemos-yolanda-d%C3%ADaz%E2%80%99s-post-populist-project-spain

https://www.eldiario.es/piedrasdepapel/yolanda-diaz-sumar-partidos_132_9620474.html

https://www.infolibre.es/politica/movilizacion-transversalidad-retos-yolanda-diaz-sumar-sea-exito_1_1274974.html

https://cronicavasca.elespanol.com/politica/20220909/diaz-manual-errejonista-construir-sumar-desde-euskadi/701929806_0.html

https://www.infobae.com/espana/2023/06/05/ser-la-tercera-fuerza-dar-la-batalla-cultural-y-no-renunciar-al-perfil-transversal-de-yolanda-diaz-las-claves-de-sumar/

https://www.epe.es/es/elecciones/generales/20230706/sumar-estrena-campana-23j-reto-desbancar-vox-89563375

There isn't a perfect English translation of the Spanish concept of "transversalismo ideológico" (in fact the Spanish Wikipedia article on transversalidad (ideología) doesn't have a counterpart in the English Wikipedia, nor in any other language's Wikipedia apart from Catalan's one ), but I think "syncretic politics" would be the closest (in fact the Spanish Wikipedia article on transversalidad (ideología) says this: "transversalism is very similar to the concept of syncretic politics, but it differs from it in that the former rejects the validity of the political spectrum, stating that it is obsolete or not useful, while the latter accepts it and simply positions itself in a neutral and pragmatic position, in order to reconcile both sides, left and right"). In fact the political position of the Spanish political party Frente Obrero / Workers' Front is characterized as "transversalismo" in its Spanish Wikipedia article & as "syncretic" in its English Wikipedia one. Then you have Caminando Juntos, another Spanish political party, whose Spanish Wikipedia article was deleted due to being considered an act of self-promotion, but its English Wikipedia article is still up, and it characterizes its political position as "syncretic", despite none of the article's sources characterizing it as such & a majority of them characterizing it as "transversal", which is indeed the way its political position is widespreadly characterized by most Spanish news media outlets.

At first I was just going to add "syncretic" to Sumar's "political position" section, just like in the case of the aforementioned Caminando Juntos' English Wikipedia article, which as I've said characterizes its political position as "syncretic" despite the sources (all of them from Spanish news media oultets) characterizing it as "transversal", but I've decided to add "transversal" too in case someone objects to my edit on the basis of "none of the sources you've provided characterizes Sumar's political position as "syncretic"", which is true, but, as I've argued at length, I believe "syncretic politics" is the closest English translation to the Spanish concept of "transversalismo ideológico" despite not being a perfect one, and as I've proved, in at least one English Wikipedia article, the Caminando Juntos one, "transversal" is directly translated as "syncretic", and the political position of a Spanish political party (Caminando Juntos) is described as "syncretic" despite the Spanish media articles that are listed as sources characterizing it as "transversal", so I think that a case can be made for the addition of "syncretic" to Sumar's "political position" section, but as I've said I've decided to add "transversal" too in case someone objects to my edit on the basis of "none of the sources you've provided characterizes Sumar's political position as "syncretic"".

In any case, whether just "syncretic", just "transversal" or both, I firmly believe the addition of one of the two (or both) is necessary, since as I've said I believe that "left-wing to far-left" on its own definitely doesn't do justice to the coalition's political position nor to the way its political position is characterized in the Spanish media, and even if you disagree & believe that "left-wing to far-left" on its own definitely does do justice to the coalition's political position & to the way its political position is characterized in the Spanish media, the "transversal" characterization of Sumar's political position is well sourced, so, just like I personally object to the "far-left" characterization but admit it is well sourced & that therefore its inclusion in Sumar's "political position" section is warranted, I think you should do the same with the "transversal" characterization. Lekim9 (talk) 22:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Separating the party and coalition.
(Pinging @Impru20 since he seems to be the guy in charge of virtually all Spanish politics articles, and doing a great job at it)

Shouldn't Movimiento Sumar (the instrumental political party that seems like it's starting to organise itself as a proper political party) and Sumar (the coalition that gathers the several political parties of the Spanish left) be separated into two proper articles? Wikidata and several other wikis seem to do that and I feel like it's a more appropriate distinction, especially since Movimiento Sumar will merge with parties such as Más País (and I've heard internal rumours that other groups may be intending to do so too). Tidjani Saleh (talk) 13:34, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No. We don't have different articles for the Together for Catalonia (2017) coalition of 2017 and the political party of 2018; nor for the En Comú Podem 2015 coalition as opposed to the 2016 party; nor for the En Marea 2015 coalition as opposed to the 2016 party; nor for the Convergence and Union coalition of 1978 as opposed to the 2001 federation of parties; and so on. We don't have different articles for political parties and for parliamentary groups neither, despite these being arguably different entities.
 * And we don't do that for a very simple reason: politically, these are basically one and the same thing (normally, the initial coalition transforming itself and/or evolving into a party from the foundations of the alliance). In the case of Sumar, a separation would mean that we would have to duplicate content into two separate articles (since the background of the "party" would be the same than that of the coalition).  Impru 20 talk 15:07, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Parties of the alliance
User:CroatiaElects is reverting my editions and I want to avoid an WP:WAR. The composition section of the article is simply false.The alliance was created to concur to the 2023 Spanish general election by 20 political parties. Not one more not one less, as can be verified at the official documents presented to the Central Electoral Commission. There are 22 listed now plus 2 "former members" (another mistake, as they the alliance can not be changed, Podemos members left the parliamentary group, a completely different thing). It's not an opinion. It's a fact. There is also a continuous and confusing mixing of the alliance with the single political party Movimiento Sumar, a member of the alliance, but just one of the members.--Banderas (talk) 07:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Position
There are sources for centre-left too. I think the best it's to add only left-wing. Hidolo (talk) 22:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)