Talk:International Democracy Union

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Added the country flags using the ISO 3166-1 alpha-3 template. --DandanxD 12:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

People's Party of Spain[edit]

The map is supposed to show the countries where there's a member of the IDU in government as of 2016. The spanish People's Party has been in the government since January 2012. The map should be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.126.48.103 (talk) 14:51, September 12, 2016 (UTC)

data[edit]

old ones
134 / 350 
146 / 265
updated ones
66 / 350 · cfr.: es:XIII legislatura de España · 13th Cortes Generales (better explanation in: Senate 265 = 208 + 57)
69 / 265 · and es:Senado de España · Senate of Spain

--PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 19:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 updated --PLA y Grande Covián (talk) 19:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Liberal Party of Australia[edit]

Listing the LP as "the only full, associate or observer Liberal Party" is incorrect and unencyclopedic. Nearly all parties in the IDU identify themselves as economically liberal, and many are also socially liberal with respect to other parties in their countries. Pointing out that the LP is the only party in the IDU with Liberal in its name is not neccessary and the way User:Timeshift9 has done it here is quite misleading; it's an observation that can be easily made. Is the National Independence Party of Azerbaijan the only party that supports independence? Are the Nationalist Republican Alliance and Nationalist Party (Malta) the only nationalist parties? Either reword the "Liberal Party" observation, or stop adding it. --NEMT (talk) 12:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't have to stop adding it if concerns were raised correctly via this talk page. What is the dispute of the wording? What will suffice? Timeshift (talk) 15:49, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to be any clearer - you're adding a false statement. Nearly all the parties in the IDU identify their ideologies as liberal. I suppose if every party listed save the Australian LP underwent a radical shift in policy overnight, that would be sufficient cause for your statement to be included. --NEMT (talk) 18:27, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm referring to the party name not the ideology. Timeshift (talk) 22:42, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While that may be true, it wasn't clear from the context of what you added. Ask yourself if that's actually worth noting in the article. There are many nominally unique parties on the list, there's no reason to make note of it. --NEMT (talk) 00:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
'There are many nominally unique parties on the list' - not like the Liberal Party of Australia. Timeshift (talk) 00:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment[edit]

Moved from the article. Cenarium (talk) 16:15, 14 May 2008 (UTC) [reply]

The information given that the Progress Party of Norway is an IDU Observer Party is simply incorrect and must be deleted.

Sincerely, Eirik Moen IDU Executive Secretary—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eirikmoen (talk • contribs) 16:11, 14 May 2008

membership types[edit]

Does anyone know the specifics as to what the different levels of memberships entail? What is an Observer party? On Thermonuclear War (talk) 04:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing, what is the distinction between "in opposition" and "Minority Party"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.109.138.72 (talk) 23:29, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, whether you have a parliamentary system (where the majority party forms the government) or a presidential system where a party can have a majority in the national assembly (parliament, congress, etc.) but not have the presidency. Only the US gets that listing, which makes me suspect that an American was being a little precious about the distinction. I don't mind preciousness, but I'd prefer it if it was applied universally. 144.32.154.5 (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Macedonia - new full member[edit]

Macedonia has been accepted as a new full memeber (as per IDU News), no longer having an 'observer' status, so I changed its place in the listing accordingly. --B. Jankuloski (talk) 22:37, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced table[edit]

Hello all,

I just noticed that the entire "Member parties" section is unsourced. We need to find third-party sources that provide a list of member parties in IDU.

Regards, Gold Standard 21:03, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A list of members is clearly within the scope and style of Wikipedia and is done on the IDU website, so finding another source that replicates the list is not required. Per WP:V, "It must be possible to attribute all information in Wikipedia to reliable, published sources that are appropriate for the content in question.". Which is is, if you look at Google Books, for example. However, a third-party source that produces a list is not essential. If you'd like to contest any of the entries, confirming them independently of the IDU website should not take much effort. Bastin 18:54, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
If that is true, would you please comment on the discussion at the bottom of this page, where this is being discussed: Talk:Interlibertarians. Thanks, Gold Standard 19:26, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Unsourced Table[edit]

The following was the result of a discussion concerning the verifiability of organizations with lists or tables of members:


Resolved: Lists or tables of members belonging to a political international or other organization that are unsourced or sourced by self-published sources must be deleted. When an organization claims it has members it is self-serving, and therefore must be deleted under WP:V. Please note that this applies to all organizations with members, including all other political internationals.


Thus, per WP:V, the table of members on this page must be deleted, and remain deleted, until the table can be properly sourced by independent sources.


Regards,

Gold Standard 22:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is in direct contravention of WP:POINT. Unless you have specific concerns about specific entries, the table is adequately-referenced as it is. Bastin 11:33, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not illustrating a point. The consensus was reached here: Talk:Interlibertarians#about_edit_warring. Thanks, Gold Standard 18:20, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And basically what you're saying is that it's fine to use self-published sources to list members on this article, but not on another article. This, in my opinion, is completely unacceptable. Gold Standard 18:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say that - I have no interest in the other article, nor do I have an obligation to have one, nor does my lack of interest mean that Wikipedia policy should be ignored here. To seek to import your flawed logic from a new article, like that one, to another article does breach WP:POINT: in letter and spirit. If you want my opinion on another article, as you seem to be, please don't try to disrupt this one. Bastin 18:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Ok, I understand now. I will revert my edits. In all honesty I was just trying to improve consistency. Feel free to comment on the other article if you want to. Also, the "flawed logic" is certainly not my own logic. I was on your side during the discussion. Thanks, Gold Standard 18:56, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

australia[edit]

update map to make australia green, since conservatives now in power there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.107.137.167 (talk) 11:00, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on International Democrat Union. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The logo of the union could be added to the template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.99.192.220 (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Republican Party[edit]

Trump is now the President, when will America be included on the map as a country with a member Party in government? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 191.251.227.85 (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The US has a presidential system with 3 tiers of power (House of Representatives, the Senate and the Executive Branch), not a parliamentary one with only one tier. There's no "party in government" because the Democrats are also in government too. A correct way to put it is "House, Senate and Presidency are under GOP control". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:447:C000:D449:BC01:703D:7CB2:5C92 (talk) 13:52, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
When the GOP controls all three then it is fair to depict the GOP as in government because they are. - SantiLak (talk) 20:55, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on International Democrat Union. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:20, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Headquarters[edit]

The article currently has a source saying it is headquartered in Oslo, but the IDU website says their address is in München, Germany. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 17:43, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Israel[edit]

Likud party from Israel has joined the Union.1 It was finalized on February 19, 2018. Sokuya (talk) 09:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It been reported that the Likud joined the union as its 73rd member.2 Someone need to update the map. Sokuya (talk) 13:03, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The name[edit]

Why is it called International Democrat Union? 49.3.72.79 (talk) 13:11, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Page name change[edit]

The IDU has changed its name to the International Democracy Union as of September 2023. The page should be renamed as well. IDUIntern (talk) 11:15, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, User:IDUIntern. The organization's name appears to have been changed. Do we have a source that specifically describes the name change? --Precision123 (talk) 16:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The change was announced on our social media pages (https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cww65oYowzn/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==)and it can also be visible on our website, www.idu.org. Would you be able to help us amend the Wikipedia page? IDUIntern (talk) 22:55, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the page and included the previous title in the introduction, with a link to this Instagram post. If your organization publishes a textual press release announcing the name change, please add a citation to it to the article in addition to this video. Dan Leonard (talk) 00:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:International_Democracy_Union&oldid=1209311967"