Talk:Regional Council of Molise

Political groups

@Scia Della Cometa: Do not edit war continuously like you always do. I explained it to you many many times: if you make an edit and someone reverts it, you DO NOT revert back!! Read WP:BRD. Now, regarding the tables: the tables list the political groups in the assemblies, so they have different names and we should report what the sources say. --Ritchie92 (talk) 10:19, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: You are ignoring this and keeping edit warring. I already warned you. --Ritchie92 (talk) 10:25, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: Also, from this edit comment here: does the Prime Minister have anything to do with the Regional Councils? What are you talking about? This is not an article about the parties or the groups. There is a table with the group composition of the Council: we MUST put the names in the sources and not change them! --Ritchie92 (talk) 10:32, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92: You have modified these pages, but where is written that we must use the perfect translation of the italian names of then groups? We do not use official names even for important things, like the President of the Council! Nobody cares about this, I created these pages to show the composition of the councils, not to let people know if "Berlusconi Presidente" is written in the name of the groups. If you want change the original version, research the consensus and don't begin an useless edit war! In my view these edits are highly redundant. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 10:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: The reason why you created the page has no meaning and cannot be used as a point of discussion. Nobody cares why you created the pages. My edits are more than legitimate since I am reporting the official names of the groups, as we also do in Legislature XVIII of Italy and all other pages like those. You have no right to interpret the group names as you wish, on WP we must report what the RS say. Your comments like not to let people know if "Berlusconi Presidente" is written show a high disregard of what official sources say. By the way, the President of the Council is called "Prime Minister" because almost everybody calls it like this in English news and books. We have no source to say that the group "Berlusconi Presidente" in Molise is called only "Forza Italia" in English, so you are doing WP:OR here. Also, let's imagine the group changes its name and removes "Berlusconi Presidente": that could be a rather crucial difference and a political statement. We have no right to insert random translations removing pieces of the name. Finally, my edits were more than a month ago and nobody said anything against (obviously because they report what RS says!) Your edits instead are disruptive and you should stop editing when someone reverts you! You are being bold, and it's ok, but after a revert you need to discuss! Read WP:BRD (which does not apply to edits of ages ago, obviously...) --Ritchie92 (talk) 11:15, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

So, apparently according to User:Scia Della Cometa now one needs consensus on edits of more than a month ago to have content from original sources not removed. So I'm asking the opinion of other users interested in Italian politics, like User:Checco, User:Nick.mon, User:Autospark, etc. Can we arbitrarily change the names of the political groups as SDC suggests, or should we report the official name of the groups (in the composition tables)? --Ritchie92 (talk) 11:07, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92: a quite poor reasoning... In the pages of the governments and of the elections we don't use the official name, like Presidente del Consiglio, Forza Italia Berlusconi Presidente, Lega Salvini Premier, etc., I see no reason to do so it in the pages of regional councils, since these edits seem to me very redundant. You are reversing the meaning of the speech, you have modified the original version of the pages (almost all created by me, but this doesn't matter), if you make changes that I disagree with, I have the right to revert them! If you think an international reader is really interested in knowing that the group in an Italian regional council is called "Forza Italia Berlusconi Presidente" or "Democratic Party Legislature XVII", research the consensus first.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 11:41, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: You don't WP:OWN the pages... I am allowed to add sourced content. You still haven't justified your arbitrary translations. Do you know what the reader is interested into? How can you? We should limit to translate the original names of the groups, the rest is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. Also, do not use the President of the Council as an example, as it is actually used in the Prime Minister of Italy article (first sentence) as the official name, and further uses of its name are due to the common use in political debate. To summarize: You can't decide by yourself to disregard what sources say (and most importantly you can't edit war about it). Also you appear to not know the difference between a party and a political group in a Parliament or Council... Surprising. --Ritchie92 (talk) 11:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92: you just continue to get around the topic, I NEVER STATED that these pages are my property!!! You are the one who want to modify them without me restoring the original version (original version which inevitably were mine, since almost all of these pages were created by me). My dear, I know the difference between a party and a political group, but the principle of using names is quite the same. If you expect to change a basic principle, you cannot do it against the opinion of others --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: Please tell me which "basic principle" you are referring to... And I am not going against opinions of anybody: I (in July) added sourced content. You did not. If you want to put your translations, you need to give WP:RS justifying them. But since we are listing the political groups of the Regional Councils, the original sources are the official ones (as they should be) and they do not have the names you arbitrarily chose. --Ritchie92 (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92: I have not invented anything, the "basic principle" consists in using the names of the parties without useless frills, like "Berlusconi Presidente" etc. The principle for regional council groups is the same, WP:RS has absolutely nothing to do with it, and you are mentioning this rule improperly. "if you make an edit and someone reverts it, you DO NOT revert back" is your statement: well, I have reverted your changes and restored the previous version, YOU started this useless edit war, and for what??? To add Berlusconi Presidente, Salvini, Legislature XVII etc.?? The arbitrary choice seems to me only yours, since you do not accept that your modification was removed. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:24, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: I'm sorry but you keep misrepresenting what happened. You boldly changed the official name with an arbitrary translation (I still don't see from where did you take the "rule" that one cannot use the official names). Then I reverted you and you should have started discussing. You did not revert my changes, see the history there are no revert messages in your first edits of yesterday (actually you did not even deem worthy of your time to add a comment to explain your arbitrary edit). So you definitely edit warred, but let's go past that. I will try not to behave like this next time, and let you do all the edit war you want (like User:Checco knows very well). Let's discuss about the point here: You decided a "rule" by yourself (when? where?), and expect that the whole Wikipedia community follows it without questions? Again, where did you take this rule from? Where is it stated that anybody can change the official names of political groups according to their personal taste? --Ritchie92 (talk) 12:36, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: The arbitrary choice seems to me only yours, since you do not accept that your modification was removed. one day you will explain me the logic of this sentence. You are saying that it I made an "arbitrary choice" to "not accept" that my "modification was removed"?? I can't understand. I am saying you arbitrarily translate, I did not do anything arbitrary: I refer to official sources. --Ritchie92 (talk) 12:44, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92 And where is written that we must use the entire name of the regional groups and not the only common name of the party?? I restored the previous version, that you have arbitrarily modified. I have not decided any rule, I have used the English name of the parties for the regional councils as we already do for the lists in the elections, there is nothing new! Where is the "arbitrarily translation"? The removal of "Legislature XVII" from "Democratic Party", "Salvini" from "League" and "Berlusconi Presidente" from "Forza Italia" are not "arbitrarily translations", but removals of useless frills, which we already do in other contexts. You're making a lot of noise for nothing. ps. In the official/reliable sources there is no translated name, so following your reasoning we should also use only the Italian names. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: Ok you officially started using random illogical excuses just to bring your point forward. Like this one: And where is written that we must use the entire name of the regional groups and not the only common name of the party? this is such a meaningless question... The question would be "who tells us we can modify the official name?" and not "who tells us we should keep the original name?". To make it easier: you must justify why you change the official sources, not why you keep them. In Italy we say "stai rigirando la frittata" (you are flipping the omelette on the other side). This encyclopedia is based on reliable sources, we cannot invent names (and political groups in Parliaments are different from political parties, you know?). Translating is allowed, by the way, this is not Italian Wikipedia. What I did is perfectly reasonable, and you are the one making a lot of noise for it (and gaslighting me for that). I used the English translation of the parties that is everywhere on Wikipedia, just adapted to the official names of the political groups. Also the fact that we do something wrong in other context does not justify doing it everywhere else (and by the way, which other party composition of Italian Assemblies are you referring to? I only am aware of these Regional Councils and the various Legislatures composition). --Ritchie92 (talk) 13:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Surely, when someone makes an edit and someone reverts it, the former user shall not revert back. I have pointed this several times. I am also quite aware of SDC aka Wololoo's modus operandi and this must stop. This said, unfortunately I would add, I have no strong opinion on this issue. I will think about it a little bit. In the meantime, I will hopefully read opinions by User:Autospark and User:Nick.mon. --Checco (talk) 14:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

An example of the arbitrariness of SDC's translations: in Regional Council of Veneto, he didn't use Civic Choice for United Venetians, but kept that name, even though their self-invented "rule" would force them to use the common name of that party, i.e. Civic Choice. So apparently they only change the translations of names they don't like, as "Partito Democratico Legislatura XVII" or "Forza Italia Berlusconi Presidente" (and I don't know why they don't like them, there are some interesting variations to the usual names!) --Ritchie92 (talk) 14:43, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92 and Checco: Can you two explain to me why you can always undo my edits and I can never do it with yours? But do you realize that it is a one-way speech? There was a consolidated version and I can't restore it, when you always do it.

@Ritchie92: Are you happy now ([1])? That group is not even referred to Civic choice (which is no longer exists); anyway, (according to my modest point of view) there is a certain difference if a party presents itself with a different name (like the League) or only with a simple slogan added in the name (like Forza Italia - Berlusconi Presidente). --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Just to make sure, United Venetians has nothing to do with Civic Choice. It is a pro-Zaia group, formed by Dalla Libera after he left the centre-left.

This said, as I already said, on the broader issue I am undecided and I am going to think about it. Hopefully, User:Autospark's and User:Nick.mon's opinions will help me to form my opinion. --Checco (talk) 19:20, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

In my view, when we have one of Italy's main parties, even if the name of the parliamentary group differs from the party's name, we should use the latest, because it's more recognizable and it creates less confusion. -- Nick.mon (talk) 21:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

@Scia Della Cometa: What is a "one-way speech"? What does it mean? Can you two explain to me why you can always undo my edits and I can never do it with yours? You totally can! (And you do!) The problem is when you revert a revert! I will say this one more time: if I revert one of your edits you should not take it personally and revert back, instead you should discuss immediately after. But after a long time of dealing with this, I think it's a lost cause. Also, there is no such thing as a consolidated version of these articles! Many of these had only one edit in the history: the creation of the article. This, as well in all other articles, does not count as "consolidated": nobody ever discussed about this before, so you cannot claim a previously existing consensus. My edits were fully legitimate. --Ritchie92 (talk) 07:48, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Another example of arbitrariness: in many Regions, like Regional Council of Piedmont, the LN group is denoted with the regional name (in this case League Piedmont). This is totally arbitrary! Why not Lega Nord Piedmont? Why not Lega Nord Piemont (without "d")? Why not just Lega Nord (following the other parties: main party name)? Completely at SDC's taste. I repeat myself: there is no reason why we are allowed to change the political groups' names (and I agree totally with User:Impru20's reasoning on Talk:2018 Italian general election/Archives/2021/July#Electoral list names, where a similar issue is discussed). --Ritchie92 (talk) 07:35, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ritchie92: [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] And Now, are you satisfied? Is it resolved this "arbitrariness"?? You are saying that if I rollback your edits it is fine, if instead I restore the previous version with a general edit it is not good: this reasoning makes no sense, rollback or not I restored the previous version, and you starded an edit war. ps. Per "one-way speech" intendo un ragionamento a senso unico.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:32, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Of course I am not satisfied (and you don't need to satisfy me, you need to edit following WP:RS and not fall into WP:OR and WP:SYNTH): you haven't been paying attention to my point. I am not satisfied for two reasons: (1) the edits you just did are still arbitrary translations, as arbitrary as the ones before; (2) restoring the previous version is not always the right thing to do, especially when by doing so you're removing what the reliable sources say and inserting an unsourced name just because you (and somebody else) like it and just for some groups and not for others. So in summary, the situation is the same as before, in that the regional councils' groups are not listed by their official names but by the name of the party they refer to, and we know very well that parties and parliamentary/council groups are not the same thing. --Ritchie92 (talk) 21:16, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I specify this for the last time, these three criteria (WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:SYNTH) have nothing to do with this thread. In these pages there is nothing invented, there has simply been a uniformity of all the pages through the elimination of useless frills which are added to the name of each group without particular political motives. The composition of the councils is taken directly by the official websites, so WP:RS is respected, just as it is certainly not an original research to delete "Legislature XVII" from the name of the regional Sicilian group of the PD. And it is more than evident that WP:SYNTH concerns the content of a page and certainly not of simple denominations. There are Italian parties that have unofficial or cut off names as the title of their page, I would worry more about those...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

What you call "frills" are part of the official names of the groups, that you removed, therefore reporting what WP:RS say in the wrong way violating WP:INTEGRITY, based on your WP:OR about the "proper" translation, or based on WP:ILIKEIT principles, and furthermore committing WP:SYNTH of the parliamentary/regional groups with the parties they come from. --Ritchie92 (talk) 16:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

They are principles concerning substantial aspects, not formal aspects: the content of the pages remains clear, unambiguous and above all not invented, since "a wrong translation" is another thing. The aforementioned 3 criteria have nothing to do with this matter, also WP:INTEGRITY concerns citations and certainly not the way to indicate parties in an assembly. And about WP:ILIKEIT? It's only an Argument to avoid in deletion discussions. I invite you not to cite more criteria inappropriately, because all those you have listed have nothing to do with this matter...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:45, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

The name of the groups is not formal, it is substantial. WP:ILIKEIT is not a policy, I am not saying that it is. I am just saying that you are insisting on keeping a wrong translation without a reason apart from you liking it. And it is a wrong translation of the groups' names: groups are not parties! Anyway I won't discuss with a wall anymore. I will ask for other editors' opinions. --Ritchie92 (talk) 20:44, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Third opinion page break

Response to third opinion request:

Howdy hello! I saw that y'all posted this page for discussion at the Third Opinion page. If you're willing, I'd like to be able to help. I've never edited this page before, and don't believe I've interacted with you folks before, and am thus a neutral observer. I've looked over this debate, and as I understand it the concern is over what name to put on political parties, yes? All pages are linked using the name of the corresponding Wikipedia page, as far as I can see. I'll admit I'm a bit confused as to the meaning of the contested material. From the edit summaries, I see you folks adding or removing the names of what appears to be politicians, not political parties. Why attach the name of who I assume is Silvio Berlusconi? Sure, hes the head of the party, but the partys name is not his? Captain Eek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 21:59, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi User:CaptainEek, thanks for replying. The issue is that we are not listing political parties but parliament groups in the Regional Councils. These groups have names listed in sources (official) like this one. My opinion is that we should keep what the sources say and use the groups names that are in the source (even if they include the party's leader in the name). --Ritchie92 (talk) 22:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Aha, thank you. So I looked a little deeper, and currently the Politics of Molise and 2018 Molise regional election pages list the common name of the party, and don't include the politician names, which I think could be reason to do the same here. While I agree that we say what reliable sources say, we don't say exactly what they say: that would be a copyright violation. We have to often be choosy about what to use from a source too, just because a source includes 10,000 data points doesn't mean we include them all; we just use the data that is sufficient to get the point across. I think using the common names of the party is sufficient, since I think the extra stuff adds some unnecessary confusion, especially to users who have no clue about how to speak Italian. I don't think the extra words are necessary, unless the party isn't already wiki-linked. The wiki link is disambiguation enough. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:39, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I still am not convinced, since parties and groups are two different things. For example, there are groups which do not belong to any party: for these we use the full name translation (e.g. Toma for President in this article). Why? I don't see consistency in the treatment of various groups. Furthermore, the names of Council groups are not copyrighted. --Ritchie92 (talk) 22:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

If we agree Wikipedia:Official names should apply to use in an article as well as article naming, then we should use the most common name (in english). Which may not be the official name. A quick google search seems to indicate the common name in english excludes the politicians name , at least for the couple of examples I tried. ---- Work permit (talk) 22:57, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

@Work permit: I really doubt that you could find online a common name in English for the groups in the Regional Council of Molise. I see a lot of confusion about the difference between the parties (which of course go by the common name) and the parliamentary/council groups, which sometimes also change name during the same legislature. When one refers to a group or a party in the text, I agree with you. However if we are giving a detailed composition table, why not use the official full name? --Ritchie92 (talk) 06:53, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

If the political groups are different entities than the political parties, why are they hyperlinked to the political parties in the article? I was under the impression seats in the regional council are assigned to parties based on a mixture of plurality and proportional representation. What is the subtlety that I (and two other editors) are missing? ---- Work permit (talk) 13:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

@Work permit: Parties are voluntary associations of people, parliamentary groups are institutional entities. Obviously most parliamentary groups have a one-to-one correspondence to a party or a group of parties (national or regional), but this must not necessarily be the case, since the elected members are not forced to adhere to the group relative to the party they belong to (and in practice this happened various times in Italy). Furthermore in Italian political history, groups change composition and name a lot during the same legislature, so sometimes there is a non-trivial distinction. Also members of smaller parties sometimes enter the groups of major parties in order to have a group participation. To see a practical example of this difference at a European level, see the European People's Party and the European People's Party group in the European Parliament. Of course, little groups in Regional Councils are not as relevant, so there is no push to create their own separate article, hence the hyperlink to the main party (when there is a clear connection). --Ritchie92 (talk) 13:51, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I understand the distinction between political parties and governing groups. Even here is the U.S., we have the Democratic Party (United States), the House Democratic Caucus, Senate Democratic Caucus. And even here, independents and members of smaller parties enter groups of major parties. Yet when we speak of membership in our representative bodies, we use the party name not the full name of the caucus. We speak here in terms of parties, because the groups and parties are mostly aligned. Since you point out the European Parliament, I will observe that the party names are used in the section European_Parliament#Political_groups when there is a one to one correspondence, and the group is used when it refers to an alliance of parties.

Which brings us back to this article. You haven't made a compelling case that there is a dramatic enough difference to use the official name, which is basically the party name with the leader attached to it,and the associated party.---- Work permit (talk) 15:02, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

There is a dramatic difference for all those groups which do not have a corresponding party (also in this article), namely the difference between nothing and something. In that case we indeed show the name of the group, with the surname of the leader, and all the other frills. And of course we could not do otherwise since there is no other option. I find it inconsistent. --Ritchie92 (talk) 15:11, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation of the party v. Group difference. Being still unfamiliar with Italian politics, could you perhaps link the equivalent page of some other regional council's for comparison? Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 15:18, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Here is the list Regional_council_(Italy)#List. They appear to use the shortened name. Presumably Ritchie92 would like to see all of them changed?---- Work permit (talk) 15:35, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Exactly, like it was until a few days ago when User:Scia Della Cometa changed them all in one go. --Ritchie92 (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Are those groups with with no affiliation generally smaller in relation to those with a corresponding party? If so, perhaps consistency leads to a more confusing article and a worse outcome. Perfection can sometimes be the enemy of the good.---- Work permit (talk) 15:20, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Usually yes, but not necessarily (some electoral lists linked to one Regional Governor candidate might get quite a lot of votes sometimes, like in Regional Council of Veneto for the Zaia list). Also for these smaller parties, having the name of the Governor candidate they refer to is actually helpful to understand which political side they are closer to, since there is no hyperlink explaining the political detail about those factions. --Ritchie92 (talk) 15:44, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

So it sounds to me like the article would be most clear if we used the common name for the commonly known parties and used the full name for these "one off" and minor council groups. Use Zaia for President, but Forza Italia (without the Berlusconi for President). I'll also point out there is no other name for Zaia for President, and no dispute it is the common name for this group. ---- Work permit (talk) 17:24, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Ok great. In my opinion this is inconstitent, but I see your point. --Ritchie92 (talk) 17:40, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Work permit and CaptainEek: first of all I point out that I didn't modified all the pages at once, but I only restored the previous version of these pages. However, I will explain the situation briefly: very often the Italian parties (or rather, the lists of the parties), especially those of the centre-right, run in the elections by entering in their name/symbol the name of their leader (like "Forza Italia - Berlusconi Presidente", "Lega - Salvini Premier" etc.) and often these names are also used by the respective parliamentary groups. For the elections we have always used the simple name of the parties/lists, without slogans or various frills, so, in my opinion, the same principle is fully applicable also for the assemblies. In regional elections, in the coalitions there are always civic lists in support of the candidate for president and they are almost always called "[Name of the candidate] for president", in these cases the name of the candidate is an integral part of the main name of the list. For these reasons I substantially agree with you.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:15, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

I would like to point out that there is also an ongoing discussion about naming of electoral alliances and lists in Talk:2018 Italian general election/Archives/2021/July#Electoral list names. --Ritchie92 (talk) 21:34, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

I read all the discussion rather quickly, thus I might have missed something important, but, having thought throughly about it, I have to say that I broadly agree with User:SDC, User:Nick.mon and others on the issue. When a political group is clearly linked to a political party, I would use the name we already use for the Wikipedia article, thus "Forza Italia" not "Forza Italia — Berlusconi Presidente", "Brothers of Italy" not "Meloni — Brothers of Italy", etc. This said, there can be several exceptions to the rule. One I see is that of the "national" (meaning "regional") sections of the Northern League: in that case it is good to have two links instead of one. Relating to civic lists, when they are closely linked to a political party, that should be explained. I am much open to discuss specific cases. What about using Talk:List of political parties in Italy as the place for discussing all controversies on the naming of parties. Lately, I disagreed with some moves done by User:SDC ("Apulia First" to "Apulia First of All", "Lively Aosta Valley" to "Vallée d'Aoste Vive", etc.) and I look forward to opening a thread on all of them there. --Checco (talk) 07:31, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

The point is not how to name these groups in the titles, in the text, or in general in places where one has to read the full name. The point is the name in the tables: the tables should reflect exactly what the official sources say, otherwise we violate WP:Verifiability! I really don't see what is the added confusion of "Berlusconi Presidente" added to "Forza Italia", when we all know this has been their slogan for 25 years! And furthermore, in a single composition table, not in the text! User:Checco, I already see that you now favor an exception for the League. Why should we translate "Lega Salvini Molise" as "Lega Nord Molise" or "League Molise", and cherry-pick the word "Salvini" to throw away? (and by the way how do we pick the correct one among these?) I think somebody here is missing the point, confusing what is a party and what is a group, and trying to simplify things that are not simple, just because they don't like the names. --Ritchie92 (talk) 07:45, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

I have no strong opinion on this and you may be right. I would not like to be the one to decide on the isse and, luckily, many others are contributing to this discussion. Simply, I would put it simple: sometimes simplicity and clarity may trump precision. --Checco (talk) 13:48, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Checco I did not understand what the titles of those pages had to do with this thread (that is: nothing; I moved "Lively Aosta Valley" and the title can very well be discussed).

@Ritchie92 "Lega Nord Molise" doesn't exists and in this page both Salvini and the name of the region have been removed. As regards the name of the League and of the interested region, in my view an exception can be made for the northern regions, since the page of the regional sections of the League already exists, so also the name of the region would already present in the title of the pages (Lega Nord Toscana, Lega Nord Liguria etc.). However, I don't think the addition of leaders' names creates confusion, I just think they are superfluous, for me it's a formal issue. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 16:09, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

The Lega Nord Molise was just an example... By the way the names of the leaders or whatever else are not a formal issue, they are not superfluous, there is a reason why some groups put that in their official names. You say they are superfluous based on what information? --Ritchie92 (talk) 16:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC)