Talk:United Regions of Serbia/Archive 1

URS vs. G17 Plus
Partial c/p from Talk:Serbian parliamentary election, 2014:


 * ElectPartei - The United Regions of Serbia were founded and officially registered as a political party in no earlier than 2013. Therefore Mlađan Dinkić cannot be a leader earlier than that, and for the sake of consistency, it is my opinion that we shouldn't base it off of an electoral list of a coalition led by G17+ that had existed in the previous election, just like we don't calculate together MP seats of political parties that in the meantime joined others (but where distinct at the time of the last election).


 * Nikgudz - We all know in Serbia that URS is successor of G17+ and that URS participated in Elections 2012. So it is not new party de facto. They were coalition but with all elements of party. Only formaly they established in 2013. But that should not be the most important. They are not new, we all know them for 3 or 4 years.


 * Sundostund - As for URS, their establishment as a party in 2013 was only a formality. They were founded in 2010 and gradually superseded G17+. They already had de facto party structure when they participated in the 2012 elections. Being part of Serbian political life since 2010, they certainly aren't a "new party".


 * Lukitrans - Agree with Sundostund and Nikgudz, it's the same party so I don't see why argue again about something that has already been discussed during the Elections. — Preceding undated comment added 12:13, 16 April 2014 (UTC)


 * How about you provide an actual coherent argument based on, you know, facts. As well as address the arguments I have listed below before unilaterally editing the article when I specially asked for a consensus be made first. Buttons (talk) 05:36, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

While it can be argued that the URS is the de facto successor of the G17 Plus, we cannot include events (such as past elections, leadership, etc.) that occurred in the latter in this article. Its completely nonsensical considering that the URS was formed by more than just one party. In that regard I support ElectPartei's opinion, over the two below them, in keeping these two separate. If anyone disagrees with this assessment, form a consensus here first before changing the article. No edit-wars. Buttons (talk) 01:20, 16 April 2014 (UTC)