Talk:Moderate Youth League

Text and/or other creative content from Young Conservative Moderates was copied or moved into Moderate Youth League with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

The renaming of this article - doubts

I am not very convinced of the validity of renaming this article "Swedish Young Conservatives". That name is not used on the organisation's official website, and it Googles only 49 times, whereas "Moderate Youth League" Googles 1,120 times.

Even in the source used to justify the move, I note that in the brief letter itself (which is in English) the National Chairman does not use an English-language name, but refers to the official Swedish name:

[1]

--Mais oui! 09:17, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Mais oui! on this. Generally, I would recommend posting a note to the Talk page before moving an article that have been around under a single name for quite some time. In this case, an eight-year old archived web page in which the status of the English term is very unclear does not seem to be enough to justify a move.

The current MUF page does not seem to have an English version. Note, however, that several official pages such as the Nordic council use "Moderate Youth League": [2]

On the other hand, Moderate government ministers seem to favour a third form, "Young Moderates", in their official CV's:

"Young Moderates", however, does not seem to yield practically any other relevant Google hits.

There are even other forms that seem to be more common than "Swedish Young Conservatives", such as "Moderate Youth Federation", used on Gunnar Hökmark's official Moderate party page: [3]

My position is that, in a case where there seem to be no obvious official use, Google hits are generally the most relevant measure. Even if filtering out "wikipedia" from the Google hits actually brings the number of hits down to 236, that's still five times more than the 44 hits for "Swedish Young Conservatives" -wikipedia. As things stand, I would support a return move. Alarm 16:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The general rule is that English translations of names are to be used for english wiki articles. The exception is if there is another, more commonly used English version of the name (it does for example make sense that LO is translated as [[Swedish Trade Union Confederation). In this case there is no widespread and established English version of the name, thus a direct translation of the Swedish name (i.e. Moderate Youth League) should be used. I support a move back. --Soman 16:14, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All good, guys. Now let's not move stuff around any further, you fuck up my watchlist. ;) Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 11:49, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree with the title of this article being "Moderate Youth League". As I have shown, the name "Swedish Young Conservatives" is the term used on the organization's own website (yes it's old, but afaik it's the only version of their website available with an english translation). It is also the name used on the official websites of the Moderate Party, the Swedish Government, the European Parliament and the Youth of the European People's Party (YEPP).

A search for "Moderate Youth League" at Google gives almost only results from Wikipedia pages and its many forks, a search for "Moderate Youth League"-wikipedia -encyclopedia gives 32 results of whom 9 are from Wikipedia forks. On the other hand, a search for "Swedish Young Conservatives" -wikipedia -encyclopedia gives 34 results of which none are related to Wikipedia or any of its forks. Thus, "Swedish Young Conservatives" is the most commonly used English form as well as the one used on official websites as shown above. /Slarre 14:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But with this background, can we not conclude that no well established English naming for the organization exists? Neither search is able to gather more than a handful of google hits, excluding wikipedia. I think it is highly probable that 'Swedish Young Conservatives' was an official English naming, but isn't used anymore (MUF has changed politically over the past years, 'conservative' is not the best term today anymore). I case no established official English naming exists, then a direct translation into English should be used. --Soman 14:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to see if I can get in contact with them to see what official English name they use nowadays (I tried before but didn't get an answer). /Slarre 19:05, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like Google is a little unpredictable. When I try "Moderate Youth League" -wikipedia -encyclopedia I get 140 hits. The URL string looks a bit different, but I don't know what that reflects - could someone help explaining? Also, note that on the Odenberg CV that you refer to as Swedish government use, the line just before "Swedish Young Conservatives" uses "Moderate Youth". If you compare the page to the Swedish version you'll notice that "Swedish Young Conservatives" is indeed a translation of "Moderat Ungdom", while "Moderate Youth" is the translation of "Moderata Ungdomsförbundet". This is somewhat confusing, but as I've noted above, all Swedish government pages actually use "Moderate Youth" for "Moderata Ungdomsförbundet". Alarm 13:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has now been confirmed via mail that "Swedish Young Conservatives" is indeed their official translation in English:

Ämne: Re: Muf på engelska
Från: Carl Grufman <Carl.Grufman@moderat.se>
Datum: 13:49
Till: xxx@xxx.net

Xxx Xxx <xxx@xxx.net> skrev den 18 februari 2007 klockan
16:29 +0000:
> >Hej! Vilken är den officiella engelska översättningen av namnet "Moderata
> >ungdomsförbundet" som ni föredrar att använda er av i engelskspråkiga
> >sammanhang? Jag såg att "Swedish Young Conservatives" användes på er 
> >gamla websida, men gäller det fortfarande?
> >

Japp
Vänligen, Carl

Now that this is confirmed I think the article should be moved back, as official translations are preferred. /Slarre 14:28, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still believe its better with a direct translation of the original name. The common convention is that an english translation is given, unless there is a more common name used in English. It seems to name that this is a name only used by MUF in their own international contacts, not widely used in English language media. --Soman 12:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say this is a borderline case.

Just to start by clarifying what the conventions actually say: The general rule (see Wikipedia:Naming conventions) says "Use the most common name of a person or thing that does not conflict with the names of other people or things". The "most common name" refers to the most common form in an English language context. Thus, usage frequency should be the most important factor. Neither an official translation nor a literal translation would be preferred if another form is more commonly used.

In this case, "Moderate Youth League" and its close variants might have an ever so slight advantage in terms of frequency of use. On the other hand, none of the many different English translations that can be found have all that many Google hits. In such cases, I think some weight might be given to the organization's own, "official", choice of translation, literal or not. However, I would say such an argument is valid only when the organization itself actually actively uses the suggested translation. The fact that the Swedish government uses "Moderate Youth" in official translations suggests that the organization's preferred translation is completely unknown to professional translators and Moderate party government members alike. This makes me lean towards using the literal translation, which is no less frequent and closer to the form used in the Swedish government translations.

For the moment, I'd say I'd weakly support "Moderate Youth League". The moment MUF actually uses the term "Swedish Young Conservatives" e.g. on their current web site, I'll probably change my vote. Alarm 23:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I just did copyediting and cleanup at Moderate Students, but I'm not convinced it should continue to be a standalone article given all the issues it still has tagged and due to the dearth of coverage in reliable English-language sources (only 1740 Google hits for "moderate students" sweden -wikipedia). Take away the listings of board members and chapters from that article, and you just have a few sentences that would snugly fit into the Moderate Students section of this article. --BDD (talk) 05:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I second this motion. Merging it would do just fine. Pepparkaksgubbe (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Moderate Youth League. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:19, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]