Talk:Brothers of Italy/Archives/2022/December

Nationalism

@Checco and @Vacant0: I didn't understand one thing: why do you want to remove nationalism (a source widely covered by the sources for this party) from the infobox? Is there any specific reason? I can't figure out the reason. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:03, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

It is all about consensus. A proposal was put forward by User:Davide King (having just two ideologies in the infobox: "national conservatism" and "right-wing populism") and that has now become the article's established consensus. There is no consensus on having also "nationalism", as there is no consensus on having "sovereigntism" in the Lega article and, more generally, on adding every ideology that is sourced. As I argued before, only a few ideologies should be listed in party infoboxes and I stick to that. --Checco (talk) 21:30, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

The infobox is supposed to include ideologies that the party is mainly associated with so, regarding nationalism, we should rather see if that ideology is due enough to be included in the infobox. The current consensus stands that national conservatism and right-wing populism should be in that section, with neo-fascism in the footnote. Any additions should be discussed just for the sake of avoiding edit wars. Vacant0 (talk) 11:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

@Vacant0 it's not true that every addition has to be discussed first, Wikipedia doesn't work like that. There was consensus to include those two ideologies, certainly not to exclude others. If there is no consensus to include certain information (or if there is consent to exclude it) it is another matter. But these positions must be justified. So I'd like to know why you're against including this ideology.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:32, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, when you removed nationalism from the infobox on August 3 of this year, it doesn't seem to me that you did it as a result of a discussion.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Read the edit summary: "Nordsieck source only mentions "national conservatism", which is present in the infobox". Vacant0 (talk) 15:51, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Read again what I've said. I haven't said that discussions must take place for every addition, but that they should in this case so that potential disputes can be avoided. I also never said that I'm against including nationalism, but that "we should rather see if that ideology is due enough to be included in the infobox". I'm aware that sources clearly exist for this description, but would it be helpful to include it alongside national conservatism, a nationalist form of conservatism, and right-wing populism? I don't think so. Vacant0 (talk) 15:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

@Vacant0 And why don't you think so? I think the opposite, for example. Furthermore, you recently removed nationalism from the infobox even when I pointed to sources that quoted it explicitly (including Nordsieck)...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 16:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I think that the infobox should only contain ideologies that the party is mainly associated with, this is in resemblance to MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE which states that "the purpose of an infobox is to summarize key facts that appear in the article", and that "the less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose". There's not a doubt that FdI has been described as also holding other labels, so including every single label in the infobox would not be helpful and would violate the aforementioned manual of style. I'm not against including nationalism if it is actually what the party is mainly associated with, so I think that the best option would be to hold a RfC in order to determine which actual ideologies (or an ideology) should be included in the infobox. I'll look more into what scholars and experts think but as of now I'm in favor of either switching national-conservatism for nationalism (so that this section in the infobox would only include nationalism and right-wing populism) or removing national-conservatism and only keeping right-wing populism. Vacant0 (talk) 14:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Vacant0 FdI is surely a conservative party, but it seems to me that it is much more often described as a nationalist party than a (right-wing) populist party. Anyway, I totally agree with you to start an RFC on the matter.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 22:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

No problem with a RfC. At this time several sources may be confusing, as the party is not primarily nationalist or right-wing populist, but is more properly described as a mainstream conservative party in the British Tories / ECR mould. Hopefully, observers will evolve on the matter. Some, like The Economist have just begun doing that (see the latest special report). --Checco (talk) 07:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Checco: IMHO this party is not comparable to the British Conservative Party, much more heterogeneous internally than FdI. On the other hand, many sources, including very reliable ones, describe FdI as a nationalist party (after all, why on earth should it be a negative concept?). Anyway fine, let's proceed with an RFC. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 11:09, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

That source only mentions this:

• Italy’s new government needs to make deep economic reforms: "Yet Ms Meloni has been careful to play down her party’s roots, insisting that she is merely a “conservative”.".
• Political instability in Italy has always affected reform: "She is unashamedly nationalist and, like Mr Salvini, has flirted with the idea of leaving the euro. Her party is a member of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ecr) group, which once included the British Tories (indeed, she is its president)."

There is no mention of FdI being described as a "mainstream conservative" party in that source and this "mainstream conservative" description seems to be a description that Meloni actually uses to describe her own party. Vacant0 (talk) 12:34, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Checco The League has nothing to do with this discussion, and the consensus about having or not "sovereigntism" is the same as having or not "regionalism", just to say. However, I would also like to know from you why you are against the inclusion of this ideology in the infobox, it is not enough to affirm that there is no consensus or to be against it without explaining the motivations.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:38, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Of course, every editor can do bold edits, but, when those edits are challenged, he/she should refrain from implement them and he/she should seek consensus first. There is no consensus on adding "nationalism" in this articles's infobox, as there was no consensus on adding "sovereigntism" to Lega's infobox. On the merit, I favour having only a few ideologies in infoboxes (big-tent parties like Lega or the SVP may have more, same for longtime parties) and I am fine on having only two encompassing ideologies in this infobox. National conservatism and right-wing populism as clearly the most appropriate and sourced ideologies for FdI. I also favour reducing the ideologies in Lega's infobox. --Checco (talk) 19:48, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Again, the League is another topic (and regionalism was challenged just like sovereigntism). You have not explained why you are against nationalism (widely supported by the sources), you must provide a reason for your position to be valid. There has never been a consensus to remove nationalism from the infobox, just as there has never been a consensus to keep only two ideologies, this must be clarified.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Again, User:Davide King's version (having only two ideologies in the infobox, namely national conservatism and right-wing populism) was (possibly boldly) implemented and has since been supported by several users (implicitly or explicitly) and upheld until now. On the contrary, in the Lega's talk page your bold edit of adding "sovereigntism" was challenged by three users and no-one supported you. The FdI's infobox is consensual, "sovereigntism" in Lega's infobox is not. --Checco (talk) 22:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't intend to discuss further about other parties here, even if I have not seen three oppositions about that matter. Anyway, I have found the thread you keep quoting about the "Davide King's version" (Talk:Brothers of Italy/Archives/2022/February#Problems of this article). However, it doesn't seem to me that that discussion was actually finished, indeed nationalism, for example, was also removed long after that discussion. I think a broader discussion of which ideologies to list and which not to list would be very useful. How useful would be the motivation (which I have already asked you about) concerning the exclusion of nationalism from the infobox.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)