Module talk:Political party/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Green Party of England and Wales

Is it sensible to add a new colour for the Green Party of England and Wales rather than just updating the existing one? Has this been done for any other party? I don't think it's really necessary to use two colours for the same party just because of a minor rebrand.  dummelaksen  (talk • contribs) 13:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, this is not sensible. The Labour Party (UK) changed their colour in 2020 and this was simply reflected in the template. GPEW 2023- is not a new political party, so this new field is confusing and ambiguous. Joeykins82 (talk) 13:26, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Two options, either make a post-2023 variant to show the new colour, or change the colour and accept that pages referring which should show the old colour will not be correct. Primefac (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I think the latter is fine – it's roughly the same hue and it's still widely recognisable as the party colour. Parties can change their shades quite often and making a new entry for each change could get out of hand.  dummelaksen  (talk • contribs) 22:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 May 2023

change the Unity Party of America color to #733795 Vaulttec2022 (talk) 00:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -Lemonaka‎ 08:43, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Labor–Farm Party of Wisconsin

Can we get this row set with the color value #17aa5c to match the Wisconsin Green Party, a pseudo-successor party. That makes most sense to me. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Also would like to see the shortname listed as "Labor–Farm". Thanks! -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 18:58, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

If you think it's uncontroversial, go for it. Primefac (talk) 19:12, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok will do, wasn't sure if this required some kind of approval process. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 19:20, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Kuomintang has a abbrev KMT

Kuomintang has a general abbreviation KMT. That abbreviation is well known.

Democratic Progressive Party is already there with DPP abbrev. So KMT should be too.

—- Running 19:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

You are welcome to add it in. Primefac (talk) 08:44, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Edit request 23 April 2023 Red Green Alliance - Request for a color change to Orange

Description of suggested change:

Over some time now, I've been reverting edits, and had edits reversed as a conflict has occured in relation to color codes for Danish Politics. So after arguing with other wikipedia editors, I have now acknowledged that there needs to be a solution. I will therefore apologize for my behavior, and I will admit that it has not been ideal. However, I hope you will consider my case, and I will now present the reasons I believe for why a color change is necessary for Red Green Alliance .

Here in Denmark, our main brodcasters are DR and TV2. They use some specific political colors assigned to the different parties we have at the moment. Both of them uses the color orange to represent the party, as seen here (Ø represent the party) . Apart from that on the official site of the parliament, orange is also the color used to represent Red Green Alliance (EL represents the party)

Here is two pictures to demonstrate why I believe that orange would be an improved color for the party.

(current)

(my proposal)

Another argument is that the color code used Danish People's Party is yellow. This is despite the fact yellow doesn't appear on their own website.

I really hope you will consider this, as I believe it would become easier to see the difference between Green Left and Red Green Alliance

To whoever reading this, have a nice day :)

Diff:

−

ORIGINAL_TEXT

+

CHANGED_TEXT

Thomediter (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Party colours should match what the party's logos etc are. The proposed change doesn't match. IMO the two colours are different enough to be visible (  ). Number 57 21:26, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

But Danish People's Party doesn't do that. Thomediter (talk) 21:30, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

So propose a change there. Number 57 21:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

No, because the point I want to make is that the top priority should be to make each party stand out from the others. Danish People's Party's other colors are red and blue, but we already have multiple parties with those colors. Therefore yellow is used on wikipedia, just like our brodcasters use yellow. It is the same for Die Linke, who has a red logo, but we use purple on wikipedia to seperate them from the SPD. I think the same should account here, so that Red-Green Alliance is easy to seperate from Green Left. Orange is the color used by the brodcasters. So as we have applied this logic for Danish People's Party and Die Linke, I think we should apply the same logic for Red-Green Alliance. Thomediter (talk) 21:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

But they already have colours that are visibly different (as shown above), so your suggestion is needless. I could equally argue that your proposal makes their colour too similar to the Social Democrats. Number 57 22:13, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Well the diagram should match the colors. Also you are trying to argue that these look alike?   , when one is red and the other is orange. Thomediter (talk) 22:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

It would if the parliament diagram module wasn't broken at the moment (or you could just update the svg version on commons). And yes, I personally can see much less difference between those colours than the two compared above. Number 57 22:25, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

If that is the case, then we should consider updating that color code too. Another thing is that Green Left and Red-Green Alliance are both closer to each other on parliament diagrams, and therefore not being able to see the difference between those two parties are a bigger issue. Thomediter (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Apart from that, on the parliament diagrams it is not easy to see the difference. I would like some other's inputs, even if it's also disagreement, cause if I'm in the wrong here, then so be it. But then I'd like an explanation for why we use a different logic for Danish People's Party and Die Linke. Thomediter (talk) 21:34, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

It appears the parliament diagram does not use the parties' logo colours, which I used above. This is where the problem lies. Number 57 22:15, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

I still think that having 3 colors that are red is way too much, when we have unused colors like orange. There is a reason our brodcasters use orange, and I think it will be confusing to see a different color when look at Danish sources, compared to looking on wikipedia. Thomediter (talk) 22:38, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

References

Still yet to be solved

- 25 April 2023 Thomediter (talk) 21:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

It's only been two days. WP:3O is always an option if no one is responding. Primefac (talk) 07:51, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi again :) I've now recieved agreement on this edit request from a third and fourth opinion. Apart from this, on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elections and Referendums#RfC about party colours, another opinion argues that per WP:RS, supports the logic behind my edit request.

@Primefac Can this edit request be performed now? Thomediter (talk) 15:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, there seems to be a consensus, so you can implement your proposed changes. Primefac (talk) 10:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at it :) Thomediter (talk) 10:01, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Dispute - Asking for a third opinion.

The color code being used for Red-Green Alliance is being discussed. The current color code being used is  . This color is being used due to the image of their logo on the Red-Green Alliance.

The discussion revolves around whether this should be maintained as the color.

The arguments for keeping the current color code   is

• We should use the color of the party's logo on wikipedia
• The colors of Red-Green Alliance  , Social Democrats   and Green Left   on here are not confusing

While the arguments for changing the current color code to  

• The media (DR, TV2, parliament site) in Denmark uses Orange for the party, and there is a personal analysis that the reason the media uses Orange is to make it stand out from other parties
• Other parties such as Danish People's Party and Liberal Alliance uses their media color instead of their logo color on Wikipedia
• Having red colors for 3 Danish parties, when there are not a very high number of Danish parties, are too many

Thomediter (talk) 21:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand why you are still pushing this. You got a third opinion in the other discussion (which you then tried to hide), which was to stick with the logo colour as is standard practice. Why try and create inconsistency... Number 57 22:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Because it matters a lot to me. I like spending my times on making Danish election pages, but I become so frustrated when the colors are too similar and doesn't make sense. Why have incosistency with some parties having their colors based on media and other parties based on logos. Thomediter (talk) 22:20, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request (Disagreement on color code being used for Red-Green Alliance):

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Module:Political party and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

It appears that reliable sources use orange for the Red-Green Alliance, so we should follow the reliable sources. "What about X" isn't a particularly compelling argument; perhaps the practice for Die Linke and Danish People's Party should be changed too. This issue might require a broader discussion (and potentially an RfC) to establish consensus. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Number 57 22:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

A third opinion given here argues that orange should be used as reliable sources uses Orange. I am asking for your permission to change the color code based on this. I'll give you some time to agree on it, if you won't allow it, we should find an agreement on how to further proceed the case.

Best regards, Thomediter (talk) 00:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't agree to it. I presume the provider of the third opinion isn't familiar with how party colours are usually decided on Wikipedia (similar to the issue you created on the Green Left one, where an editor who is familiar gave a third opinion, you ignored it and got another one that was different). If you want to get informed views on how to decide party colours, advertise this discussion at WT:E&R. Number 57 08:05, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I did not ignore it, it’s shocking that you can make yourself create a a wrong telling of events just to fit your preferred point of view. All I simply did was to point out that the third opinion did not include argumentation, which is required, and asked for a new one until the other one had argumentation. We had a new one which agreed with me, and now we have a 2-2 in that case.

Here because you disagree, your are saying that the editor isn’t qualified to give their opinion? I could just argue the same about editors who disagree with me.

Either I’m changing the color now, or we agree to start a bigger disscussion, to solve this issue.

Before when the third opinion agreed with you, you were ready to close the discussion, but now that the third opinion disagree with you, you consider it invalid. That’s not how it works. Thomediter (talk) 08:58, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

It's shocking that you would seek another opinion rather than wait for the third opinion provider to explain their rationale. It was clearly an attempt to try and bypass an opinion you sought but then disagreed with. Your conduct throughout this dispute has been appalling, even sinking so low as to add revenge !votes to AfDs I started. As for my view on the third opinion above, we have an established way of deciding party colours, and this clearly goes against it. I would like informed opinion rather than drive by ones. Number 57 09:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

THE Fourth opinion also agrees with me about the color change. Looking at the different parties we have on wikipedia, we can't conclude that party colors are chosen based on their logos, when at least all these parties (Die Linke - Liberal Alliance - Danish People's Party - DUP - Socialist Left Party - Christian Democratic Party - Swedish People's Party of Finland - Fine Gael - Lega - Forza Italia) doesn't have their party colors based on their logo, but on the media colors instead. I'm eager to change the color codes, but will wait for your permission of course. If not I'd like your help start a new broad discussion about this case. Thirdly, I can also wait of changing the Green Left color until we get more opinions there, but the arguments on this page agrees to change Red-Green Alliance to orange.

About the third opinion case on the other site. I agreed to consider it done as I read the third opinion, but later learned that argumentation was a requirement, and we didn't know if arguemntation would ever come, and so I listed it on the third opinion again until either argumentation or a new third opinion came.

Where should the eventual discussion take place? Thomediter (talk) 09:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

You could have waited a few hours, but were clearly desperate to get an opinion you agreed with. As I said above, the best place for a discussion is WT:E&R. Number 57 09:35, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I will add a talk page. It's true I was desperate to get an argumented third opinion, because the case means a lot to me, I didn't ask for an opinion I agreed with, I asked for argumentation as to why editors would believe I was wrong Thomediter (talk) 09:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Fourth opinion: much as I hate to disagree with N57,a much respected admin, it seems fairly clear here that insofar as any standardised colours exist for these two parties, it is indeed orange for the Green Red alliance and pink for the Green Left, usage we see across several different reliable sources. Picking the colour based on selecting part of the logo with no other evidence seems less robust and more like original research. I'd suggest we go ahead with the change. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I would strongly suggest we don't, and instead we have a proper discussion with editors who are familiar with how party colours are usually decided on Wikipedia. Number 57 09:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Aside from the WP:OWNership issues implied by the assertion that we have to wait for unspecified people "familiar with" the topic in question, it's not like those people's opinions would carry much weight anyway, if they don't conform to WP:V. If the only rationale for the dark red is that it's plucked by Wikipedians from a logo, versus numerous reliable sources using the orange, then there's not really anything those experts can say to alter the situation. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 09:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree with your saying here :)

Also an important factor is that currently when taking the color code from the logo on their website, it doesn't match with dark red, as it has been updated since. Logo's change relatively often, so to have their colors based on logos, would mean we'd might have to change color codes too often. On their website they even have a white logo as well, but we don't use white for the party. Thomediter (talk) 09:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Agree with this. I've seen no evidence of a consensus on color-picking, other than thr allegation that this is standard practice, but silence is the weakest form of consensus and that alleged consensus is being challenged now. If this is a broader issue, and disputes like this arrive often, I think an RfC at WT:E&R might be appropriate. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Edit request 1 August 2023

Description of suggested change: Could Module:Political party/D be restored to revision 1167046416 made on 10:06, 25 July 2023 and could Module:Political party/R also be restored to revision 1165601200 made on 06:30, 16 July 2023? The revisions following this by a guy named named Mikeblas as casued pages with the alternative parties of the Democratic and Republican parties (United States) to show no color in infoboxes and tables. 199.168.200.8 (talk) 02:26, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Could you give an example of where this is causing issues? I can't see anything obviously wrong with his changes that would cause them not to show up. Cheers, Number 57 05:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to Mikeblas. Primefac (talk) 07:50, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

This is happening for any election that uses the state-level parties in their infoboxes. For instance, see the 2022 California State Assembly election page. Since the infobox was made using links to the California Democratic and California Republican parties, there are no colors in the infobox. UruGhan (talk) 09:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Ah, this is presumably because that article uses "California Democratic Party" rather than "Democratic Party (California)", so Mike's edits broke the redirect at Module:Political party/C to "Republican Party (US)". The solution is to go through all the modules and fix any double redirects like this. Perhaps some code/bot needs to be set up to identify any double redirects within the template and fix them? Cheers, Number 57 10:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Is there a way to fix this for all jurisdictions (the states, DC, and territories)? UruGhan (talk) 11:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

 Partly done: I've gone through and avoided any double redirects (i.e. US -> United States). Should all be good now. Primefac (talk) 13:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Actually, I meant to revert my changes completely when I figured out that this code is developing a short name and not a link target. I was trying to avoid links to redirects which I thought were consistently generated by this module, but this module isn't involved and it's instead the parameters to the template that cause the redirects.

I want to revert my changes to both Module:Political party/R and Module:Political party/D ... I thought I had done back on the 29th. Does that mean the compensating changes to Module:Political party/C should be rolled back at the same time? (I think so.) -- Mikeblas (talk) Mikeblas (talk) 16:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Let's figure out what we want this to look like, and I'll hit things with AWB and get all of them at once. Primefac (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 5 August 2023

Need to include some party colors for a few political parties inside Albania and add a few. Gjondeda (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Primefac (talk) 13:08, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Add Request: Vesna – Green Party

["Vesna – Green Party"] = {abbrev = "Vesna", color = "#00A65E", shortname = "",}, Jocafus (talk) 02:10, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

​ Go for it, though I will note that "Vesna" should go in shortname not abbrev. Primefac (talk) 07:40, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Perfect, done. Thanks! Jocafus (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2023 (UTC)