Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Archive 28

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

→

Archive 35

Splitting public-policy from technical material at Computer security

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see Talk:Computer security#Some initial ideas on a split and an overhaul.

Summary: The present article is a mish-mash of material of a general nature (technical, academic, practices, history, terms, incidents, notable-figures) and material of a socio-political nature (infrastructural, regulatory, legal, corporate, financial, espionage and cyberwar, public impacts).

This started as an RM discussion but turned into a scope one. I've proposed that a Cybersecurity article (using the term favored in technology-and-public-policy circles) should be a spinoff, per WP:SUMMARY, for the second group of material, leaving the bulk of the more general info at Computer security (the basic, non-jargon, descriptive term for the field). This would be in keeping with Cyberwarfare, Internet privacy, Internet censorship, Genetically modified food controversies, and numerous other clear splits between technology and technology policy articles (sometimes multiple such articles, e.g. Electronic cigarette → Regulation of electronic cigarettes, Safety of electronic cigarettes, and several others – but let's just start with one here).

I've done a section-by-section review of what needs to be done, but it's just one opinion, so additional input is sought.

Politics: In particular, I'm eager to separate the international and national policy/regulatory material from the technical nuts-and-bolts stuff. There's a whole section for this at the current article, but it's kind of jurisdictional list of trivia and not very cohesive. And the entire "big international deal" matter, like Russia likely interfering in US elections, and the US, China, and other countries engaging in something of a system-cracking secret war, are unmentioned but should be have a whole section about them.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ<  10:43, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

Left wing Italian political movements

When going through fixing links to domain reselling pages, I've noticed that there are a lot of dead links and poorly formatted sources in articles about left wing Italian political movements, such as Movement for the Left and Refoundation for the Left. These articles need attention from an Italian speaker as almost all the sources are in that language. Cross-posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Italy and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics as I'm not sure which is most appropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 20:13, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Positions on Jerusalem

I added the WikiProject's template to the talk page of Positions on Jerusalem but it was removed. I think that it's on the scope of the project. Do you think that it should be re-added? Rupert Loup (talk) 23:31, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Politics of the United States

There is a section created by a now banned sock puppet of a single purpose account that does nothing but go around adding in their political view against Trump everywhere and arguing nonstop. Should that section be in the article? One person agreed with me it should not, one person who just put it back in says it should be. More opinions please. Talk:Politics_of_the_United_States#Concerning_the_section_dedicated_to_just_negative_press_of_one_president is where the discussion about it is. Dream Focus 19:39, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Cole Memorandum

Project members are invited to help expand and improve the newly-created Cole Memorandum article. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:33, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Independent Party of Arizona

Currently, the State of Arizona does not recognize the Independent Party as such. Voter registration notes only an 'other' category. There is a current effort to change this fact. This effort includes Gubernatorial candidate Noah Dyer and the website Independent Party of Arizona.Zen Benefiel (talk) 18:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Categories for US Presidential biographies party affiliation by state

Hi all. Bergeronp has been deleting categories identifying certain presidents with their party and a given state, often one that they grew up in. Their explanation as I understand it is that they should not be identified with these states and their politics, presumably unless they were active there. However I believe it has always been the practice to include categories for presidents and their home states/political affiliation. Perhaps I am in error. But I thought I'd kick this over here as the best place to get an an answer or to hold a discussion if the issue needs one. Thanks... -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

American think tanks template

I noticed a new Template:American think tanks today, but it does not seem to have come out of this WikiProject or any other. As I remarked on Template talk:American think tanks, the template's listing of Washington, D.C. think tanks based on their street address does not strike me as based in anything meaningful, and honestly very strange. I invite folks here to comment one way or the other.- choster (talk) 23:30, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Category:20th-century women politicians has been nominated for discussion

Category:20th-century women politicians and Category:21st-century women politicians, which are within the scope of this WikiProject, have been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:57, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Party colour template

I use colour templates in my articles, but National Party (Poland) and Ustaše (Croatia) are missing. What shall I do? --Mbakkel2 (talk) 09:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

STV and IRV and ...

Cross-posting from WP:E&R:

Here is a true thing: transferable vote is a redirect to instant-runoff voting, which asserts that IRV is sometimes called transferable vote. Transferable vote system redirects to single transferable vote, which asserts in its lead "STV is the system of choice of groups such as ... FairVote in the USA (which refers to both STV and instant-runoff voting as ranked choice voting, although there are other preferential voting methods that use ranked-choice ballots)" (citations omitted). The bolding on "ranked choice voting" suggests that it is a redirect to STV, but in fact it is a redirect to IRV. Meanwhile, the link to "preferential voting" is actually a pipe to ranked voting system, which begins "Preferential voting or ranked-choice voting describes ...." (Aside: the use of the verb "describes" here is problematic, the article should be about the referent, not the descriptor.) Also, there is ranked voting (an article) and preferential voting (a disambiguation page). I can't decide if the situation here is that there are too many articles or too few, but in any case the system of redirects, bolding, and leads seems very problematic. --JBL (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Joey Gibson (political activist)

Project members are welcome to help expand and improve the Joey Gibson (political activist) article, which has been nominated for deletion, or participate in the ongoing discussion. Thanks! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 22:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

List of far-right political parties

The article lists dozens of parties but not a single cite. Many of them may be the result of original research or personal opinion. Is there any reason to keep this article? Kablammo (talk) 22:31, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification of discussion which may be of interest to users

There is currently a discussion regarding they layout of Scottish parliamentary constituency articles here. It relates to how seats are presented after boundary changes and if every election of a member should be included and if their picture should be included. Sport and politics (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Category:Republicans

Please can members of this project comment on a renaming discussion for the ambiguously-titled Category:Republicans?

Discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 February 6#Category:Republicans --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:03, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Disruptive editor claiming Giovanni Gentile was a socialist

Please be aware of user Diak4 on Giovanni Gentile, continues to revert to version of article that called Gentile a socialist with sourcing from WorldNetDaily, a fringe right-wing site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Etzedek24 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Title discussion on Korean political party

Editors active in this project may be interested in a discussion regarding the proper title of a newly emerged political party in South Korea. Interested editors are invited to participate in the discussion. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:25, 26 February 2018 (UTC)