Talk:Independence Party of New York

Politics: Political parties Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

New York (state) Mid‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mess

This is a mess! I am having trouble cleaning it up. It's one big long rant that makes almost no sense. I am trying to break things up into smaller logical chunks. I added the wikitags, hopefully someone else can help me clean this...Eddie Tejeda 19:32, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still a mess! I added subsection names for easier editing, but such a tangled story is still difficult for the non-New Yorker to follow. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained Ideology deletions

I reverted recent deletions to the infobox of Independence Party of New York, because the edit summary did not include the an explanation of the deletion. The editor User talk:216.194.62.27 should address the change here. In particular, I'm concerned that the deletion of Independent (politics) as the ideology of the party is unwarranted. Does the party have no ideology; is there no ideology that adequately expresses the positions of the party; or do you disagree with the use of "Independent" to describe an ideology, in general? It would be better to clarify the link (or the article it links to) than to simply delete it. Somebody will just restore it sooner or later. DJ Silverfish 19:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Text Grab?

"In Nov 2006, Eliot Spitzer received over 190,661 votes on the Independence Party line, more than enough to secure our spot on Column “C” for the next four years. What’s more, 19% of those votes were produced by the New York City organization. Governor-elect Spitzer heads to Albany with a firm mandate from the voters to prioritize issues of political reform."

Looks like part of a large text grab to me, based on the detailed section and use of "our" here. --71.192.117.127 16:30, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ind logo.gif

Image:Ind logo.gif 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 Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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) 06:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs more references

Given overall interest in Ross Perot and the rise of third parties, there should be some better references by political scientists, academics and analysts with articles or books and third-party review. --Parkwells (talk) 14:38, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Essenberg had a tendency to run the party autocratically."

While this assertion can easily be verified by several knowledgeable people, it hardly seems NPOV. Tripodics (talk) 19:39, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inline citation?

Maybe this bare URL in the Leadership section can become an inline citation.

http://www.ipny.org/April27.html (Timeline cited)

New York City editor needed to improve the overall article, and to fix problems like this bare URL in a subsection. --DThomsen8 (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Independence Party of New York. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060525084650/http://www.nydailynews.com:80/front/story/268291p-229740c.html to http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/268291p-229740c.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:21, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RFCs on Third Party inclusion in the election infobox

FYI, there are two RFCs asking about third party inclusion in election infoboxes. They can be found here at talk page for project E&R.NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]