This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
and also I was talking to a polish friend. There are much better Polish articles on these subjects, do you think you could help translate them? See
and
Any help is appreciated!
Sam Spade 21:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I also skimmed through the links you provided, the last one is complete BS, (hint: I wouldn't trust a page named class war), for example the sentance "Liga Polskich Rodzin (League of Polish Families) its a main far right party in Poland, with strong representation in government." the LPR has never been a part of any government, from the article it seems to be written between Polish entry to the EU and the EU parliamentry election, during that time Poland was ruled by postcommunists, it seem imposible to mistake the two. Samoobrona also had no represantation in the government (although they did quietly back the postcommunists), never heard about Niklot. No major blunders in the second one except for the ones about father Rydzyk stated above, they do indeed oppose abortion and homosexuality the tone was a bit biased (the described events were in fact skirimishes between to groups of radicalist hooligans rather than attack by evil outlaws against people peacefully protesting their rights). As for the first one, again never heard of Niklot, samoobrona is lots of evil things but this is the first time i hear them being accused of antisemitism, UPR I've heard accusation against Stanislaw Michalkiewicz being an antisemite, perhaps they mixed him up with Janusz Korwin-Mikke (he does speak of communist and masonic conspiracies but not of Jewish ones).
I understand that the quality of my information is very poor, but these are what I could find in english. If you can help translate information from polish sources, that would be great. I will try to compromise regarding the article, but I have to base my edits on what sources I have, until I have something better. I understand these sources are anti-LPR, but I have not found alternatives w similat amounts of info. Sam Spade 16:03, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Terms like "have been seen to be related" are useless, I explaind the relation with SN and endecja above and there is absolutly nothing to indicate any sort of relation between PiS and LPR.
I'm sorry but when making wild claims it's up to You to back them up. You obviously either don't know anything about the subject or have some deep insight, unavailable to us mere mortals, which allows You to see things for what they really are. Instead of writing wp:weasel frazes such as regarded by some or have all been seen to be related (which might be true as it's quite likely there might indeed be some one who thinks so, however aren't relevent unless made those people happen to in some way important, in which case they should be directly quoted) please provide references where such view are expressed in mainstream media.
I didn't make up any wild claims. I was interested in this subject because I knew nothing about it. to learn, I talked to polish friends, read the articles I linked to (and a few others) and related wikipedia articles. I personally added very little content. The section you keep removing, about homosexuals, is not my writing. Thats info from this article, and other wikipedia articles, which I slapped together here.
I can agree to some rewording, or explaining differences of interpretation. I understand that some of these claims are false. They still need to be included however, because they are verifiable, and have sources. If you have sources for alternate data, please include them as well.
NPOV is presenting all verifiable points of view. Trust me, I want to hear all sides, and I know some of this information is unfair. But balance it, instead of deleting whole sections! Sam Spade 22:19, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Trust me, I've been editing here for a couple of years now, and I can say w some degree of confidence that were going to have to solve this problem by ourselves. An RfC might not be a bad idea, but its very unlikely to bring in editors more knowledgable than we. I think the best case scenario is that we put as much work into the article as we have the talk page, and balance things out.
I don't agree w deleting content, but it can be re-worded, cited, and balanced out w other additions to which you agree. The best way to serve the reader is to provide them with as much citable, relevant information as possible. If we can manage to cooperate and compromise it will not only benefit the article, but should be more fun for us as well. Sam Spade 17:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Your english is fine, and I think I understand you perfectly. Perhaps you misunderstand me? I will try to say things again differently. Some of the information i added may be unfair. Some of it may not be true. But it is Wikipedia:verifiable, and I feel it should be included. I am ok w you rewording, adding more information to balance things, and providing your own wikipedia:Citations, but i disagree w deleting the info. BTW, you seem like a very nice and polite person, which I appreciate, thank you very much. Sam Spade 22:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Okay I'll try to sum up what we've been disscussing here and go through the diff briefly:
If some of what I have written is unclear or simply incomprehensible please feel free to point it out and ask.
1-4 I have no problem compromising on.
5... masquarade seems POV to me.
Left right politics are seen by many (me included) as a
false dichotomy.
6. ok.
7. I thought I added new and important info.. (and a photo!)
8.1. OK, but my crazy (I admit it!) citations disagree. We should mention that certain people (radical left foriegners and gay rights activists it seems) lump them together as anti-gay and etc....
8.2. lets explain this in the article! You did a much better job here than I could have, and infinitely better than those articles I cited.
8.3. Yes, I understand, and agree it need not be mentioned a second time unless we have more info to add. I was hoping we would...
Not at all, it was brilliant, you english is far better than my german (I'm living in germany at the moment ;) Thank you again, your helping alot w this.
Sam Spade 23:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
I reworked the article a bit, if You have any constructive criticism please feel free to express it here.
I just read this article and noticed the words homosexualism a couple of times. The word does not exist in English, at least not in standard English. I changed it twice to homosexuality but it may be in other parts of article.
Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość) (PiS) is seen by some to be another anti-semitic polish nationalist party. Sam Spade 00:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
And George Bush is seen as reptilian invader by some [4] :) Doesn't mean we should include such fabrications. -- Molobo 23:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey, check out sherry shriner, the author of that website! I interviewed her by email before writing that wiki article :D
Sam Spade 23:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure people like Ludwik Dorn (minister of internal affairs), Stefan Meller (minister of foreign affairs), Zbigniew Wassermann (coordinator of secret service) would be really surprised to discover what vile antisemites they are.
This article is badly out of date. Seems like there hasn't been anything substantive added since early 2006, and a lot has happened since then. At the very least we should mention their membership in the current governing coalition. Anybody feel like doing the dirty work? -- 24.58.14.1 05:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
user:Piotrus also known as the "Prokonsul" and self proclaimed wellspring of knowledge regarding Poland on English Wikipedia, has accused the League of Polish Families to be an extremist organization. Is this factual and correct? Dr. Dan 19:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Evidently MordechaiCH is willing to call a spade a spade. Thank you! Dr. Dan 03:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest changing the label of the party's ideology. A label used for similar parties is Radical right-wing populism, although I don't see anything right-wing in any of these parties. Of all the ideologies in Europe during the last 100 years, LPR is presumably clost to fascism as it was practiced in Franco's Spain. JdeJ 21:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Polish Wikipedia describe LPR as (Official ideology/political position) :
(pl.) "Konserwatyzm" - (en.) " Conservatism"
(pl.) "Narodowa Demokracja" - (en.) " National Democracy"
(pl.) "Eurosceptycyzm" - (en.) " Euroscepticism"
English Wikipedia have only one category - "National conservatism" (which is not on Polish Wikipedia, look above)... I think that LPR doesn't have anything similar with the ND movement but thats my opinion (I can give the proofs that they aren't ND...)... We have to do something with the categories, I think that we can trust Polish version of the article.
-- Greetings [[User:Krzyzowiec|Krzyzowiec]] ( talk) 02:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
"The party's opposition to gay marriage and several other political goals of people who practise homosexuality people has led to condemnation from The European Commission[3]"
the source, http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/03/16/poland15512.htm, says « The European Commission in December 2005 condemned Poland’s Education Ministry for rejecting a European Voluntary Service project on the stated grounds that it would “propagate homosexual behavior and attitudes.” The Commission held that “homophobia is not in accordance with the principles of the EU and is a severe violation of human rights.” »
Arronax50 ( talk) 10:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
The lead misquotes given sources. Xx236 ( talk) 11:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
The right leans to decentralized society based on economic freedom and civil liberties - so the party wasn't right wing. It protested against privatisation of important companies and demanded more state control, harsh laws. Xx236 ( talk) 11:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please give me a steer on why LPR declined in popularity and is now out of parliament? There must be some verifiable causes of this. I suspect it was their crazy ideas about Tesco and the Teletubbies and their friendship with Lepper. But surely these factors alone weren't enough to cause their destruction? - Chumchum7 ( talk) 17:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Would it be accurate to characterize the party's political position (so far put as 'right-wing' with no sources available) as 'far-right', as a number of scholarly sources do [5] [6], [7], [8] (“extreme right”), [9], [10]? Estlandia (dialogue) 19:46, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on League of Polish Families. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
@
69.121.10.105: I am not sure if your edit summary there is no mention even linking the world League of Polish Families to the term far-right
is meant as a joke, if you really believe it, or if it is just plain dishonest. Let's look at some of the sources given for the sentence linking the LPR to the term "far-right":
the far-right League of Polish Families (LPR) ...(page 186)
a far-right political party, The League of Polish Families, was formed ...(page 479)
the far-right has its own significant parliamentary representation in the form of the League of Polish Families (LPR) ...(page 146)
some extreme-right political parties (e.g. the League of Polish Families) ...(page 94)
The first party is the League of Polish Families on the far right.(page 180)
It is tempting to return your compliment from the edit summary: It's pretty evident you have not read a single citation
.--
T*U (
talk) 08:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
and also I was talking to a polish friend. There are much better Polish articles on these subjects, do you think you could help translate them? See
and
Any help is appreciated!
Sam Spade 21:36, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I also skimmed through the links you provided, the last one is complete BS, (hint: I wouldn't trust a page named class war), for example the sentance "Liga Polskich Rodzin (League of Polish Families) its a main far right party in Poland, with strong representation in government." the LPR has never been a part of any government, from the article it seems to be written between Polish entry to the EU and the EU parliamentry election, during that time Poland was ruled by postcommunists, it seem imposible to mistake the two. Samoobrona also had no represantation in the government (although they did quietly back the postcommunists), never heard about Niklot. No major blunders in the second one except for the ones about father Rydzyk stated above, they do indeed oppose abortion and homosexuality the tone was a bit biased (the described events were in fact skirimishes between to groups of radicalist hooligans rather than attack by evil outlaws against people peacefully protesting their rights). As for the first one, again never heard of Niklot, samoobrona is lots of evil things but this is the first time i hear them being accused of antisemitism, UPR I've heard accusation against Stanislaw Michalkiewicz being an antisemite, perhaps they mixed him up with Janusz Korwin-Mikke (he does speak of communist and masonic conspiracies but not of Jewish ones).
I understand that the quality of my information is very poor, but these are what I could find in english. If you can help translate information from polish sources, that would be great. I will try to compromise regarding the article, but I have to base my edits on what sources I have, until I have something better. I understand these sources are anti-LPR, but I have not found alternatives w similat amounts of info. Sam Spade 16:03, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Terms like "have been seen to be related" are useless, I explaind the relation with SN and endecja above and there is absolutly nothing to indicate any sort of relation between PiS and LPR.
I'm sorry but when making wild claims it's up to You to back them up. You obviously either don't know anything about the subject or have some deep insight, unavailable to us mere mortals, which allows You to see things for what they really are. Instead of writing wp:weasel frazes such as regarded by some or have all been seen to be related (which might be true as it's quite likely there might indeed be some one who thinks so, however aren't relevent unless made those people happen to in some way important, in which case they should be directly quoted) please provide references where such view are expressed in mainstream media.
I didn't make up any wild claims. I was interested in this subject because I knew nothing about it. to learn, I talked to polish friends, read the articles I linked to (and a few others) and related wikipedia articles. I personally added very little content. The section you keep removing, about homosexuals, is not my writing. Thats info from this article, and other wikipedia articles, which I slapped together here.
I can agree to some rewording, or explaining differences of interpretation. I understand that some of these claims are false. They still need to be included however, because they are verifiable, and have sources. If you have sources for alternate data, please include them as well.
NPOV is presenting all verifiable points of view. Trust me, I want to hear all sides, and I know some of this information is unfair. But balance it, instead of deleting whole sections! Sam Spade 22:19, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Trust me, I've been editing here for a couple of years now, and I can say w some degree of confidence that were going to have to solve this problem by ourselves. An RfC might not be a bad idea, but its very unlikely to bring in editors more knowledgable than we. I think the best case scenario is that we put as much work into the article as we have the talk page, and balance things out.
I don't agree w deleting content, but it can be re-worded, cited, and balanced out w other additions to which you agree. The best way to serve the reader is to provide them with as much citable, relevant information as possible. If we can manage to cooperate and compromise it will not only benefit the article, but should be more fun for us as well. Sam Spade 17:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
Your english is fine, and I think I understand you perfectly. Perhaps you misunderstand me? I will try to say things again differently. Some of the information i added may be unfair. Some of it may not be true. But it is Wikipedia:verifiable, and I feel it should be included. I am ok w you rewording, adding more information to balance things, and providing your own wikipedia:Citations, but i disagree w deleting the info. BTW, you seem like a very nice and polite person, which I appreciate, thank you very much. Sam Spade 22:21, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Okay I'll try to sum up what we've been disscussing here and go through the diff briefly:
If some of what I have written is unclear or simply incomprehensible please feel free to point it out and ask.
1-4 I have no problem compromising on.
5... masquarade seems POV to me.
Left right politics are seen by many (me included) as a
false dichotomy.
6. ok.
7. I thought I added new and important info.. (and a photo!)
8.1. OK, but my crazy (I admit it!) citations disagree. We should mention that certain people (radical left foriegners and gay rights activists it seems) lump them together as anti-gay and etc....
8.2. lets explain this in the article! You did a much better job here than I could have, and infinitely better than those articles I cited.
8.3. Yes, I understand, and agree it need not be mentioned a second time unless we have more info to add. I was hoping we would...
Not at all, it was brilliant, you english is far better than my german (I'm living in germany at the moment ;) Thank you again, your helping alot w this.
Sam Spade 23:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
I reworked the article a bit, if You have any constructive criticism please feel free to express it here.
I just read this article and noticed the words homosexualism a couple of times. The word does not exist in English, at least not in standard English. I changed it twice to homosexuality but it may be in other parts of article.
Law and Justice (Prawo i Sprawiedliwość) (PiS) is seen by some to be another anti-semitic polish nationalist party. Sam Spade 00:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
And George Bush is seen as reptilian invader by some [4] :) Doesn't mean we should include such fabrications. -- Molobo 23:00, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Hey, check out sherry shriner, the author of that website! I interviewed her by email before writing that wiki article :D
Sam Spade 23:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure people like Ludwik Dorn (minister of internal affairs), Stefan Meller (minister of foreign affairs), Zbigniew Wassermann (coordinator of secret service) would be really surprised to discover what vile antisemites they are.
This article is badly out of date. Seems like there hasn't been anything substantive added since early 2006, and a lot has happened since then. At the very least we should mention their membership in the current governing coalition. Anybody feel like doing the dirty work? -- 24.58.14.1 05:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
user:Piotrus also known as the "Prokonsul" and self proclaimed wellspring of knowledge regarding Poland on English Wikipedia, has accused the League of Polish Families to be an extremist organization. Is this factual and correct? Dr. Dan 19:01, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Evidently MordechaiCH is willing to call a spade a spade. Thank you! Dr. Dan 03:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I'd suggest changing the label of the party's ideology. A label used for similar parties is Radical right-wing populism, although I don't see anything right-wing in any of these parties. Of all the ideologies in Europe during the last 100 years, LPR is presumably clost to fascism as it was practiced in Franco's Spain. JdeJ 21:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Polish Wikipedia describe LPR as (Official ideology/political position) :
(pl.) "Konserwatyzm" - (en.) " Conservatism"
(pl.) "Narodowa Demokracja" - (en.) " National Democracy"
(pl.) "Eurosceptycyzm" - (en.) " Euroscepticism"
English Wikipedia have only one category - "National conservatism" (which is not on Polish Wikipedia, look above)... I think that LPR doesn't have anything similar with the ND movement but thats my opinion (I can give the proofs that they aren't ND...)... We have to do something with the categories, I think that we can trust Polish version of the article.
-- Greetings [[User:Krzyzowiec|Krzyzowiec]] ( talk) 02:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
"The party's opposition to gay marriage and several other political goals of people who practise homosexuality people has led to condemnation from The European Commission[3]"
the source, http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/03/16/poland15512.htm, says « The European Commission in December 2005 condemned Poland’s Education Ministry for rejecting a European Voluntary Service project on the stated grounds that it would “propagate homosexual behavior and attitudes.” The Commission held that “homophobia is not in accordance with the principles of the EU and is a severe violation of human rights.” »
Arronax50 ( talk) 10:15, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
The lead misquotes given sources. Xx236 ( talk) 11:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
The right leans to decentralized society based on economic freedom and civil liberties - so the party wasn't right wing. It protested against privatisation of important companies and demanded more state control, harsh laws. Xx236 ( talk) 11:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Can someone please give me a steer on why LPR declined in popularity and is now out of parliament? There must be some verifiable causes of this. I suspect it was their crazy ideas about Tesco and the Teletubbies and their friendship with Lepper. But surely these factors alone weren't enough to cause their destruction? - Chumchum7 ( talk) 17:43, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Would it be accurate to characterize the party's political position (so far put as 'right-wing' with no sources available) as 'far-right', as a number of scholarly sources do [5] [6], [7], [8] (“extreme right”), [9], [10]? Estlandia (dialogue) 19:46, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on League of Polish Families. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
@
69.121.10.105: I am not sure if your edit summary there is no mention even linking the world League of Polish Families to the term far-right
is meant as a joke, if you really believe it, or if it is just plain dishonest. Let's look at some of the sources given for the sentence linking the LPR to the term "far-right":
the far-right League of Polish Families (LPR) ...(page 186)
a far-right political party, The League of Polish Families, was formed ...(page 479)
the far-right has its own significant parliamentary representation in the form of the League of Polish Families (LPR) ...(page 146)
some extreme-right political parties (e.g. the League of Polish Families) ...(page 94)
The first party is the League of Polish Families on the far right.(page 180)
It is tempting to return your compliment from the edit summary: It's pretty evident you have not read a single citation
.--
T*U (
talk) 08:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)