Talk:List of political parties in Peru

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Peru Portal
This list is supported by the Peru WikiProject.

This project provides a central approach to Peru-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload.
List This page has been rated as list-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Peru To-do:

Contents

[edit] Ideas?

I have an idea: Maybe we can fusionate all those articles in separate topics, something like:

  • Minor Political Parties (1900 - 1950)
  • Minor Political Parties (1950 - 2000)

This in order to name all of those parties that you claim, and leave the most important untouched, like the APRA and the PCP. Also, the current political parties that have representation on Parliament

And also for Shining Path/MRTA/MIR , create a subcategory with the name of "Organizations with Political Pressure" and name their current status (insurgent organizations) Messhermit 18:33, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Rv War

The reversion of this article must stop. There is no policy of limiting listing to major parties, nor any policy of merging articles dealing with separate political entities into larger ones. As to what is to be qualified as a political party, the basic definition is that it is a group that identifies itself as one (like PCP). It is not uncomplicated to keep 'parties' and 'insurgent organisations' as two separate categories in Peruvian politics, as they are often interlinked. --Soman 16:40, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on consensus, and it seems that you want to impose your own POV in this particular page. I will not rv the article today, but rest asure that I will. My proposal is writed above, if you do not wanna cooperate, then the rv war can go on. Messhermit 16:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The title of this article is "List of political parties i Peru", not "List of parties represented in the Peruvian parliament" or "List of major Peruvian political parties" or "Let's misrepresent and attempt to marginalize the left". All political parties need to be included. —Sesel 17:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I have reverted this page back to the version without all the parties. What was done was this. Soman made a bunch of stub articles (rarely more that one sentence and none with sources) for a bunch of, for the most part, small relatively unknown political parties. When it was reverted and Messhermit asked to talk it over on the talk page, instead of talking it over it was reverted and thus it turned to a revert war. I am also going to ask an Administrator about this in order to stop this sillyness.-Jersey Devil 05:02, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Being well-known by a country's population is not requisite for an organization to call itself a political party. This is an inclusive list, and if you looked at the other articles in the "political party" series, you will notice that small parties are almost without exception included. The "sillyness" is nothing other than your own narrow-mindedness. —Sesel 06:05, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Please watch you language Sesel. Narrow-minded is not a nice way to describe another wikipedist, and you are only making a personal attack rather than an accurate statement. Messhermit 17:49, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
I did not initiate a revert war. Messhermit did. A study of the history of that page will clarify that. He also made a proposal on the talk page which, IMHO, has no grounds in terms of wikipedia policy (merging articles relating to separate political entities into a single article). The main source of the articles, which of course needs to be added in the respective articles, is from a document from ONPE, [1]. I also object to the statement that most of the parties would have been small or unknown. The list includes many parties that played an important role in a certain political context, but folded long ago. Also, there are many short-lived, but not necessarily unimportant, alliances between political parties included. --Soman 12:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Spanish Wikipedia has only ONE article dedicated to most of those unknown small political parties. The rv war was started because Soman was not willing to cooperate with the organization of this article. Messhermit 14:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is the organization that Wiki:ES has for this topic: Article in spanish. As you may realice, they didn't create stubs for every single small political party, but they organized them acording to the year of it's foundation. Messhermit 14:40, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The wiki:es article is essentially a copy-vio of the ONPE document. Moreover, I fail to see the point in in merging articles concerning separate organizational entities into a single article. Of course this list might be restructed, listing links depending on year of foundation rather than alphabetical order. But that alone would hardly have motivated the reversions done by Messhermit on the article. BTW, which of the parties listed are 'unknown'? --Soman 15:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
By Unknown I was meaning that most of those parties dissapeared from the political scene without leaving any important political legacy. Also, Wiki:ES is cleary more strict with Copybio stuff, and the fact that there are several more wikipedist involved in ES states that it is much more accurate than your version of the article. Messhermit 15:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Accurate? --Soman 15:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, since most of your parties are nothing more than stubs, and little information can be added about those parties in our days. Messhermit 17:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
But then accuracy is hardly the question. Its just a matter where the info is stored. In a list or in separate articles for separate organizational entitities. Also I don't agree to the insinuation that stubs are irrelevant nor that they cannot be expanded. IMHO the list produced by ONPE is a selection of parties that has had historical relevance in Peruvian politics. It does not include groups of the type 'Agrupación de Vecinos del Barrio X...', but lists parties that have acted on nationwide scale. Which article of the ones that are taken from the ONPE list would be impossible to expand? Most of us don't have expertice knowledge of all parties, but lets not assume that it is impossible that stubs might be expanded. Stubs are not per se bad articles, they are articles to be expanded. Thus, contribute rather than complain.
Moreover, there are several reasons to keep separate parties in separate articles. One is categorizations. Not all the groups on this list would fit in the same category. Some are listed in Category:Communist parties in the Americas, some in Category:Trotskyist organisations other in Category:Armed leftist groups. If merged into a single article, such categorization would be impossible.
Also, at this stage Elections in Peru is at a embryotic stage. Only the most recent elections are listed. But when historical elections are added there is a need to be able to link to the articles of the parties that participated. --Soman 21:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
When I expanded the list and created the various articles on different parties, I obviously used the Spanish wikiarticle as the main outline. However, in several cases there was significant info that was able to be added through simple google-searches. But to built even minimal articles of all the parties listed was a overwhelming task at the time. I put my main focus then on expanding articles about the leftist movements, but there are many of the other parties on which there is actually more to be written and more information availible on the web. --Soman 21:31, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

It's retarded to exclude a party just because you haven't heard of it. This is a list of Peruvian political parties, not a list of major political parties. The nature of Peruvian politics means that there have been numerous political parties over the years. Parties in Peru, with the exception of APRA, are ad hoc coalitions. Peru Possible is the most powerful party right now, but in a few years it will probably be totally destroyed. The United Left once looked like it could take the country, and it fell apart overnight. That's just the way that Peruvian politics work.

For over 100 years American politics have been totally dominated by two parties, yet List of political parties in the United States lists many parties. Since Peruvian politics have had many more influential parties, it stands to reason that this article should list even more. --Descendall 22:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

The real question behind all this is how to organize the parties: a bunch of stubs or the type of ideas like the one that I exposed here. Messhermit 00:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
There is no limitation on wikipedia towards lists just because many of the linked articles are stubs. In fact there are many lists in which the majority of links lacks articles at all. Messhermit and JerseyDevil should look at other Lists of political parties in X-country articles, and then get back on why Peru should be the exception. --Soman 11:13, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

We have an interest in this as we along with the other members of Wikiproject:Peru regularly contribute to Peru-related articles. All we ask is that the list be put in some kind of structure and that the articles on the parties have something verifiable instead of unsourced, unverifiable stubs. Until then we are well within our right to revert these changes.--Jersey Devil 11:18, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't ONPE qualify as a source? Are you doubting the actually existance of the parties listed? Interestingly you've deleted links to parties which had had both parliamentary representation as well as high scores in presidential elections. --Soman 21:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Creating stubs are not something that requires too much information. Take a look at this and tell me if they created stub for each political party in the Spaniard Wikipedia: Article in spanish Messhermit 21:22, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

That isn't even a proper argument. Spanish Wiki is not a holy scripture, and I believe that the case at stake is whether the Peru-list should abide under different rules and that of other countries on English Wiki. Moreover, joining stubs on a single page limits the scope of direct linking (from election result articles) as well as linking relations between the different parties. --Soman 10:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Again, revert until the page is put in some kind of order and there are actual articles instead of unsourced, unverifiable stubs.--Jersey Devil 13:47, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Spaniard wikipedia is a reference, and let me tell you that those type of articles are far more developed over there. Feel free to take a look, and you may realize what I'm talking about. Messhermit 15:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I had a look at it. If you follow the edit history of this page, you'll notice that I put that page as the es interwiki. If you feel that there is material on Spanish wiki that is of value to the English one, you're free to contribute and improve. At present, you are doing neither. --Soman 15:40, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

You have done nothing either. If creating a bunch of stubs is some sort of contributions, you are plain wrong. Restrain from reverting this article. Messhermit 18:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stop

Please stop your Rv War. I do not know what you both want, but a list of political parties in a country should at least include all relevant parties. Parliamentary parties are allways relevant for this kind of lists. One should not include local parties that are not active on a national level. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 20:30, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

This page needs to be protected again. Also, Soman, please don't try and falsely pass off this dispute as "vandalism" on the part of Messhermit [2]. Vandalism has a specific meaning on Wikipedia, this is not vandalism but a dispute on content.--Jersey Devil 08:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] i dont understand

why on earth do political parties names have to be translated? as they are institution names they should be put in spanish and not in bad english translations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cesarpez (talk • contribs) 19:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC).

See WP:ENGLISH. --Soman 21:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What the heck?

Why do we have to write the names of each one of these parties two different times?! --Visitweak (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Originally, the first name was in English and the second one in Spanish. At that time the articles were named in English per WP conventions. Then, some user moved the articles to their Spanish names, and replaced the English links with Spanish ones, thereby duplicating the names. --Victor12 (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)