Talk:National Peasants' Party

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article links to Christian-Democratic National Peasants' Party, but that's currently just a link back to this article. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:21, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Hundreds of thousands of its members were imprisoned ?!? This was technically impossible. Anonimu 11:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed merge

Strongly oppose merge to National Peasant Christian-Democratic Party (Romania). While that recent (now renamed) party claimed this party as an ancestor, they are quite distinct parties from different eras, with no continuity to speak of through the Communist era. - Jmabel | Talk 22:38, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Didn't Raţiu and Coposu provide some sort of continuity? If by 'continuity' you mean inside Romania, clearly there was none, but those two men were not unimportant in the inter-war party and key figures when it was restarted in the early 1990s. Biruitorul 01:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, there is some continuity (as I suppose there was for the National Liberals), but it really seems to me to be more useful to handle them in two separate articles. Among other things, it lets us disambiguate more clearly from other articles.

In general the handling of Romanian political parties has grown like Topsy. I'd be a lot more amenable to coming up with a scheme for the whole topic area than just doing this one merge. Have you had a look at List of political parties in Romania? Would you be open to changing this to a more general discussion, moving the discussion probably to the talk page of that article, and linking to the discussion from the Wikipedia:Romanian Wikipedians' notice board? - Jmabel | Talk 06:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely. I agree that the situation is not uniform enough at this point and that a unified, coordinated effort would be the most likely to achieve some sort of coherence. For the record, I also agree that the two PNŢ articles should be kept separate, perhaps with a section at the end of Article #1 and/or at the beginning of Article #2 describing what activity there was in the Romanian peasant movement, if not as a party then as an informal network of emigrés, between 1947 and 1990. Biruitorul 18:04, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I have way too much on my plate right now to spearhead anything (even after a deliberate attempt at catch-up, I'm over 48 hours behind on my watchlist), but if someone decides to start a reorganization of the Romanian parties material, I will participate, and on the pre-Communist era I probably have a pretty good a set of reference materials at my disposal that are not online, though presumably not what someone will have with access to a good Romanian university library. - Jmabel | Talk

what does victim mean? Anonimu 21:15, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

It's a bit ambiguous. It can be anyone on the receiving end of harm. For example, the person against whom a crime is committed would be a "victim". It can, in some contexts, have a narrower meaning. Here, it seems to be used in a broad sense: presumably innocent people who received punishment at the hands of a government. - Jmabel | Talk 03:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Heh, that's very subjective. A collectivized rich land owner could see himself as a victim, while the communists and the people with little or no land would consider the confiscation a right thing Anonimu 12:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)