![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
I think a change is warranted to the opening paragraphs of this article to better represent the more modern day far-right. This is a continuation of a discussion on the talk page for the People's Party of Canada article, which is labelled far-right by some sources. However, the opening paragraphs of this article, which is linked to directly, do not match the ideologies or policies listed in the same info-box. This lead to a debate when other editors refused to remove the mismatched label (because media sources in Canada have used that label to describe the party), which could confuse unfamiliar browsers who follow the far-right link. Our 2 remaining solutions were to; either create a new article to link to (specifically for far-right politics in Canada), or to modify this articles opening, I think the latter is the better solution. For example: in the beginning of this article, it says "particularly in terms of being authoritarian, ultranationalist, and having nativist ideologies and tendencies." However, in the case of the People's Party of Canada, this contradicts the listed ideology of Right-Libertarianism, and Classical liberalism. I'm sure there are many other parties with the far-right label around the world that are indeed labeled as such by valid sources, but do not conform to the very specific definition on Wikipedia. A simple solution, I think, would be to make the far-right article's opening paragraphs, more similar to the far-left article's. For example: replacing the word "particularly" with "and has been associated with" (similar to the far-left article), and clarify that there are multiple definitions of far-right. This is not all encompassing obviously, and I am open to thoughts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WatchfulRelic91 ( talk • contribs) 20:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
The change made by the user CactiStaccingCrane has not been consensual and neither have references, so I reinstate the lead paragraph to its before edition.
And the article is about the far-right, so it doesn't make much sense to talk about the far-left in the lead paragraph. Tedyand ( talk) 22:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Right-wing axis has nothing to do with autoritarianism itself (it's what's auth-lib axis about). Left is about redistributionism, right is about laissez-faire and free market. Chronophobos ( talk) 12:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Far-right politics has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to add Horseshoe theory under Far-right politics#See also. 223.25.74.34 ( talk) 13:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Far-right politics has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In order to be "fair" and "accurate", WIKIPEDIA is showing its LEFT WING bias, by NOT including and DEFINING "FAR-LEFT POLITICS" in addition to "Far-Right Politics"... 208.92.185.152 ( talk) 20:51, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
I wonder if the lede—specifically the first sentence—doesn't suffer from some
MOS:REDUNDANCY. I don't feel particularly strongly on this, so I'm not being
bold and, instead, suggesting an alternative. I mean, to put it extra bluntly, the first half of the first sentence essentially says "The far right is, on a left-to-right scale, further right than the normal right.
"
What if, instead, we said something like:
"Far-right politics, also referred to as the extreme right or right-wing extremism, refer to a spectrum of political thought that tends to be radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also capturing nativist ideologies and tendencies.
Just a thought.-- Jerome Frank Disciple ( talk) 16:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
This is pure propaganda. There have only been 2 countries identified truly as fascism. Germany & Italy, they are both all about big government and socialism ideology. These are idea that live on the left side of the political spectrum. There is nothing on the far right about being pro big government period end of subject. Fascism is a product of the left wing. 66.223.252.156 ( talk) 18:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
These are two side of the same coin of the left-right political spectrum. There are theories about how they're actually different, but no one can seem to agree about exactly why. DenverCoder9 ( talk) 01:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
The left-right spectrum explicitly paints the two as opposites: the opposite of any tenet of "left" politics is considered "right" politics.- no, this is an example of original synthesis. VQuakr ( talk) 05:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Far-right politics's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "cfr":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:41, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Statistically this should not be possible unless something weird is happening 85.148.213.144 ( talk) 15:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
The first source, "The ideological morphology of left–centre–right" mentions the term ‘extreme left,’ but doesn't say how it is defined or what ideologies it refers to. The link to the second source, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09644008.2018.1484906 "Towards a Measurement of Extreme Left-Wing Attitudes"] shows the abstract, which again does not define the term or say what it includes.
The Wikipedia article in fact continues, "The definition of the far left varies in the literature and there is not a general agreement on what it entails or consensus on the core characteristics that constitute the far left, other than being to the left of mainstream left-wing politics."
Essentially it is a relative term, not an actual topic like far right. It's like talking about tall people. How tall is tall?
TFD ( talk) 08:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Fritasconpure, I'm opening up this thread to invite you to explain your suggested addition to the lead sentence. Please engage here and make an attempt to persuade others using reliable sources rather than edit warring. Thanks, Generalrelative ( talk) 20:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 |
I think a change is warranted to the opening paragraphs of this article to better represent the more modern day far-right. This is a continuation of a discussion on the talk page for the People's Party of Canada article, which is labelled far-right by some sources. However, the opening paragraphs of this article, which is linked to directly, do not match the ideologies or policies listed in the same info-box. This lead to a debate when other editors refused to remove the mismatched label (because media sources in Canada have used that label to describe the party), which could confuse unfamiliar browsers who follow the far-right link. Our 2 remaining solutions were to; either create a new article to link to (specifically for far-right politics in Canada), or to modify this articles opening, I think the latter is the better solution. For example: in the beginning of this article, it says "particularly in terms of being authoritarian, ultranationalist, and having nativist ideologies and tendencies." However, in the case of the People's Party of Canada, this contradicts the listed ideology of Right-Libertarianism, and Classical liberalism. I'm sure there are many other parties with the far-right label around the world that are indeed labeled as such by valid sources, but do not conform to the very specific definition on Wikipedia. A simple solution, I think, would be to make the far-right article's opening paragraphs, more similar to the far-left article's. For example: replacing the word "particularly" with "and has been associated with" (similar to the far-left article), and clarify that there are multiple definitions of far-right. This is not all encompassing obviously, and I am open to thoughts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WatchfulRelic91 ( talk • contribs) 20:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
The change made by the user CactiStaccingCrane has not been consensual and neither have references, so I reinstate the lead paragraph to its before edition.
And the article is about the far-right, so it doesn't make much sense to talk about the far-left in the lead paragraph. Tedyand ( talk) 22:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
Right-wing axis has nothing to do with autoritarianism itself (it's what's auth-lib axis about). Left is about redistributionism, right is about laissez-faire and free market. Chronophobos ( talk) 12:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Far-right politics has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Request to add Horseshoe theory under Far-right politics#See also. 223.25.74.34 ( talk) 13:50, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Far-right politics has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In order to be "fair" and "accurate", WIKIPEDIA is showing its LEFT WING bias, by NOT including and DEFINING "FAR-LEFT POLITICS" in addition to "Far-Right Politics"... 208.92.185.152 ( talk) 20:51, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
I wonder if the lede—specifically the first sentence—doesn't suffer from some
MOS:REDUNDANCY. I don't feel particularly strongly on this, so I'm not being
bold and, instead, suggesting an alternative. I mean, to put it extra bluntly, the first half of the first sentence essentially says "The far right is, on a left-to-right scale, further right than the normal right.
"
What if, instead, we said something like:
"Far-right politics, also referred to as the extreme right or right-wing extremism, refer to a spectrum of political thought that tends to be radically conservative, ultra-nationalist, and authoritarian, often also capturing nativist ideologies and tendencies.
Just a thought.-- Jerome Frank Disciple ( talk) 16:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
This is pure propaganda. There have only been 2 countries identified truly as fascism. Germany & Italy, they are both all about big government and socialism ideology. These are idea that live on the left side of the political spectrum. There is nothing on the far right about being pro big government period end of subject. Fascism is a product of the left wing. 66.223.252.156 ( talk) 18:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
These are two side of the same coin of the left-right political spectrum. There are theories about how they're actually different, but no one can seem to agree about exactly why. DenverCoder9 ( talk) 01:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
The left-right spectrum explicitly paints the two as opposites: the opposite of any tenet of "left" politics is considered "right" politics.- no, this is an example of original synthesis. VQuakr ( talk) 05:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Far-right politics's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "cfr":
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. Feel free to remove this comment after fixing the refs. AnomieBOT ⚡ 14:41, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Statistically this should not be possible unless something weird is happening 85.148.213.144 ( talk) 15:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
The first source, "The ideological morphology of left–centre–right" mentions the term ‘extreme left,’ but doesn't say how it is defined or what ideologies it refers to. The link to the second source, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09644008.2018.1484906 "Towards a Measurement of Extreme Left-Wing Attitudes"] shows the abstract, which again does not define the term or say what it includes.
The Wikipedia article in fact continues, "The definition of the far left varies in the literature and there is not a general agreement on what it entails or consensus on the core characteristics that constitute the far left, other than being to the left of mainstream left-wing politics."
Essentially it is a relative term, not an actual topic like far right. It's like talking about tall people. How tall is tall?
TFD ( talk) 08:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi Fritasconpure, I'm opening up this thread to invite you to explain your suggested addition to the lead sentence. Please engage here and make an attempt to persuade others using reliable sources rather than edit warring. Thanks, Generalrelative ( talk) 20:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)