Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Archive 32

Proposed deletion of Category: Anti-nationalists
The category Anti-nationalists has been proposed for deletion. Please consider contributing to the discussion. -- Presearch (talk) 18:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Update: There was a consensus to delete, and category is now deleted. Thanks to those who participated in the discussion. --Presearch (talk) 19:05, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Templates are inconsistent, concerning heads of state
We appear to have inconsistencies in these templates, concerning the Commonwealth realms The North America & Europe templates, have the realm heads of state linked to monarchy articles, while the Oceania template has the realm heads of state linked to governor-general articles.

I suggest that all be linked to monarchy articles as the monarch is the head of state or being as it's a template, have the link to the monarchy articles with a bracketed links to the governors-general articles, as the governors-general are representatives of the head of state. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Since there appears to be no objections. I'll change the Oceania template links to the monarch, matching it with the Europe & North America templates. GoodDay (talk) 20:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No objection. --Thinker78 (talk) 21:01, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFC
Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:36, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion notice - Talk:President_of_the_Government_of_Morocco
Hey there! I'm Flooded with them hundreds. There is a move discussion at Talk:President_of_the_Government_of_Morocco requiring more participation, please consider commenting/voting in it along with the other discussions in the backlog (Requested moves). Flooded  with them hundreds 07:53, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Libcom for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Libcom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Libcom (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. 24.5.8.227 (talk) 23:34, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Great power article: Map
Following quite nasty edit-war, I started discussion on the Great Power article talk page about map in the article. Main topics for discussion: What countries should be on the map? Should the map show some sort of hierarchy of great powers (eg. using colours)? Would not be better to remove the map altogether? So far, only IPs and new accounts entered this discussion, so ipnut from experienced editors would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Pavlor (talk) 13:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Rfcs concernings infoboxes of politicians.
We've got 2 Rfcs occurring at the talkpage of WikiProject Biography/Politics and government. More input there, would be appreciated. GoodDay (talk) 16:18, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

WikiJournal of Humanities published first article
T.Shafee(Evo &#38; Evo)talk 09:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

America's Health Insurance Plans edit requests
Hi all, please pardon me (and let me know) if this is an inappropriate forum for this. I've been hired by America's Health Insurance Plans to request some updates to its article. I'm also hoping to help address the flag on the article. My requests are on the article's talk page. If anyone here is up for taking a look and offering feedback, I'd appreciate it tremendously. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:39, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Quotaism
I added Quotaism to this project as it appears relevant but also low quality and possibly overlapping with articles such as affirmative action. If this was inappropriate please feel free to remove the project. MegaSloth (talk) 09:55, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Scott Smith (American politician) GAR
Scott Smith (American politician), an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. « Gonzo fan2007  (talk)  @ 18:29, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Ordinals and offices
Why is it important to note that Richard Nixon was the 37th president of the United States? Or that Dick Cheney was the 46th vice president? I have been wondering about this for a while but could not be bothered to start a discussion. Now that I've seen Jim Mattis defined as the "26th United States Secretary of Defense", I have to ask why. It strikes me as incredibly trivial. For what it's worth, such ordinals are not given in the biographies of British, German, French and other government officials. Surtsicna (talk) 17:12, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * They're given in the Canadian government official biographies, FWIW. GoodDay (talk) 17:26, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * In the Australian and New Zealander ones too, I now see. The question remains: why? Is the number of predecessors a defining characteristic of each officeholder, something of such an importance that it needs be mentioned in the lead sentence? Surtsicna (talk) 17:56, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Perhaps this should be brought to the appropriate Village Pump for participation. If one were to start deleting these numberings (which would be across hundreds of bio articles), a negative reaction followed by reverts would be predictable. GoodDay (talk) 18:42, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Is this not the place? Surtsicna (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I reckon it is. Might be best then, to make this discussion into an Rfc, as it affects so many bio articles. GoodDay (talk) 19:25, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It seems commonly done for certain situations, so per LEAD is put in. There does not seem to be any practical use, but since it exists and is common enough for the top positions that guides speak to capitalised 'Ronald Reagan was the 40th President of the United States', 'the 11th President of Ghana', "the 2nd Earl of Guilford", etcetera.  Cheers Markbassett (talk) 04:59, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Brazil presidents & vice presidents departure from office dates
Oh man, do we need more eyes at this topic. When does a President of Brazil & Vice President of Brazil leave office? Is it at midnight or is it when their successor is sworn in? We've got related discussions on this matter, taking place on the talkpages of Jair Bolsonaro, Michel Temer & List of Presidents of Brazil. A topic which effect likely hundreds of articles. GoodDay (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Need some help on list of political ideologies
I need some help at List of political ideologies - an IP keeps on inserting a major re-ordering and it includes over 2000 bites of new material but the reorganization of data makes it next to impossible to see what they've added. It's a large list with a lot of fringe ideologies to begin with and I'm struggling to validate what in fact has been added to the list new and whether it's properly categorized. I reverted and asked the IP to chunk out their revisions into manageable bits and include edit summaries to make review easier and they didn't respond, instead just reinserting their preferred version. Their alphabetization is actually a worthwhile edit so I'd rather not just revert again, also I don't want to edit-war when I don't know for sure they've done anything untoward, it's just more than I can manage to vet on my own.

I did identify two forms of religious "anarchism" that weren't properly anarchist but rather precursors to anarchism but so far that's it in the way of questionable inclusions but I suspect there are others. Simonm223 (talk) 17:00, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Feedback requested at Alternative for Germany
There is currently a discussion going on about whether it would be appropriate to include material about a supposed connection between the political party Alternative for Germany and the administration at German Wikipedia. Your feedback would be appreciated at this discussion. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 08:21, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

New presidential candidates (US 2020)
Eyes are needed at the articles of recently declared candidates for the 2020 United States presidential election. -- Scjessey (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Social union?
I'm requesting expert opinion on whether the topic of the stub Social union is notable. And if it is, then would anyone be interested in expanding the article beyond the single sentence it currently has? Thanks in advance. – Uanfala (talk) 19:19, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Error in Utah Party Strength Info
The information at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_party_strength_in_Utah for 1897-98 on the party division in the Utah legislature is incorrect. The numbers of Republicans and Democrats is reversed. 2601:444:8400:17FA:B4E4:1644:9664:300 (talk) 17:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)Bert Kritzer, kritzer@comcast.net