Talk:Partia Demokratyczna – demokraci.pl
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I had been planning to write an article on the Democrats for some time, but never got round to it. It is OK if someone beats me to it ;-) but I do not agree with simply moving Unia Wolności to Democratic Party (Poland). The Democrats are an entity mostly based on the UW, but with considerable input from elsewhere, too. It is not just a name change - Belka and Hausner did not simply join the ranks of the UW in a different guise. UW and PD should have their own articles each; after all, you wouldn't redirect, say, PPS to PZPR either, would you? Comments welcome. --Thorsten1 08:42, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
- I would prefer to have the content in one article. Legally the PD is the succesor of the UW. Compare it with KLD or UD. A compromize could be to have a article on UW and have the historical overview etc. in both articles.Electionworld 13:39, 22 May 2005 (UTC)
- I am not sure as to the legal details at the moment, but the PD is definitely trying to be more than a revamped UW. While the UW always had the image of a highbrow circle of eminent dignitaries, the PD seems to be looking at a more popular appeal. Perhaps most significantly, with Marek Belka and Jerzy Hausner joining the PD it straddles the divide between the former communist government and democratic opposition. As for UD and KLD - these parties deserve more than a redirect, too, although they were shorter-lived than the UW; as Polish parties go, the UW was close to Methuselah. Of course, any future article on the PD should include a brief retrospective on its background in the Freedom Union, with more detailed information in the main article. Have a look at the Polish articles pl:Unia Wolności and pl:Partia Demokratyczna - demokraci.pl - note the neat box entitled Nurt demokratyczno-liberalny. Including a similar box would allow us to highlight the historical context and connections of each party while doing full justice to each. What do you think? --Thorsten1 11:04, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
- I can agree, so you are welcome to make the edit. Electionworld 12:34, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
- I am not sure as to the legal details at the moment, but the PD is definitely trying to be more than a revamped UW. While the UW always had the image of a highbrow circle of eminent dignitaries, the PD seems to be looking at a more popular appeal. Perhaps most significantly, with Marek Belka and Jerzy Hausner joining the PD it straddles the divide between the former communist government and democratic opposition. As for UD and KLD - these parties deserve more than a redirect, too, although they were shorter-lived than the UW; as Polish parties go, the UW was close to Methuselah. Of course, any future article on the PD should include a brief retrospective on its background in the Freedom Union, with more detailed information in the main article. Have a look at the Polish articles pl:Unia Wolności and pl:Partia Demokratyczna - demokraci.pl - note the neat box entitled Nurt demokratyczno-liberalny. Including a similar box would allow us to highlight the historical context and connections of each party while doing full justice to each. What do you think? --Thorsten1 11:04, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Article title
By the way, what does "demokraci.pl" mean? Perhaps there is someplace else we could move this article? The current title looks quite odd. - Nat Krause 03:53, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
- That's the name of the party. .pl is Poland's TLD, "demokraci" is Polish for "The Democrats". The party is officially called Partia Demokratyczna "demokraci.pl" because of some legal issues (a group of extreme far-right politicians hijacked the name Partia Demokratyczna just days before the real Democrats managed to register their party in the court). MarcoosPL 19:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
- Well, does anyone other than Wikipedia refer to it as "Democratic Party - demokraci.pl"? We might want to consider just keeping it in Polish in this case, since half the name is essentially untranslateable (we obviously can't make it Democratic Party - thedemocrats.com!) Other that, I think it would be better to ignore these sort of naming oddities when translating; that's what we wound up doing with the German Left Party. - Nat Krause 09:27, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Marginality issue
Regarding this edit by Molobo and the edit summary ("added infor. a bit akward that such marginal party has so much information-look at PiS article for example..."): The added information is a transparent, politically motivated POV speculation. Even though the party has been marginalised in the last election, it is - as Molobo must be well aware - the immediate successor of the Freedom Union. As such, it represents the liberal wing of the former Solidarity movement, which played a huge role in post-1989 Poland, and arguably sports more respected senior politicians than any other Polish party. Whether or not it will be able or willing to continue in its present organisational shape is open to debate; however, this is of secondary importance as the Polish party system is in constant flux. Parties split, unite, and reincarnate with new names all the time (even the now-governing PiS formed only in the run-up to the 2001 election). On a general note, if anyone finds that in comparison the article on PiS contains too little information, the proper reaction should be to add information to this article - rather than complaining about "too much information" here. --Thorsten1 22:17, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- and arguably sports more respected senior politicians than any other Polish party
- It seems that they are respected by around 2 % of Polish voters though.Anyway the edit wasn't motivated politically-according to Polish electoral law a party that gains less then 3 % isn't allowed to to get financial support from state to pay for its election costs.Also such parties aren't invited to political debates in media.--Molobo 12:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- No, Molobo, nobody would ever think that your edits are politically motivated... You are well respected everywhere for your sober presentation of facts. ;) Seriously, although the political motivation remains tangible, your edits are acceptable in their present form [1]. I just fixed the language and moved things around to get them in a roughly chronological order. [2]. The one thing I left out is the claim that political debates are reserved for representatives of parties above 3 per cent: As far as I am aware, Polish journalists can freely decide who they interview or invite for debates. --Thorsten1 21:33, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
