Talk:Renaissance (French political party)

Colour of the party

I know that yellow is common associated with liberalism, but is Yellow really the colour of the party? The logo in the page is in black and white, their homepage is all cyan and pink, the logo of the group in Wikipedia is in sky blue, when you search for the party in google you most find blue, cyan or French tricolor-coloured images... I think that yellow is not the most adequated color to represent the party

Centrism, right-wing, big-tent

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Renaissances brands itself as centrist and was actually centrist during the 2017 campaign. Its political position since evolved a lot, leaning to the right. It even occasionally embraced far-right themes, and is regularly pointing the main left-wing parties as "Enemy of the Republic" (aka State). Some also have called it Big Tent.

Labeling Renaissance "centrist" on Wikipedia is now deceptive. The French Wikipedia has stopped using a particular label in the intro. They only specify the political position in the infobox, where it says : centrism, right-wing and big tent.

I suggest we align on this and stop labeling Renaissance outside of the infobox, where we should at least add "Right wing".

talking Cherry 08:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

The party is almost unanimously described by sources as centrist. It may be centre-right for French standards, but it is definitely centrist by European standards, which matter more as this is an international encyclopedia. I am going to rollback recent edits to the intro and the infobox. --Checco (talk) 17:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

It may be described as a centrist party, but it's centre-right in economic ideology according to an independent research University in North Carolina (USA): https://chesdata.shinyapps.io/Shiny-CHES/ .

In 2019 it was classified as 6.3333 (1 being extreme left, 10 extreme right) 2A02:A447:6A8F:1:2007:D155:86A:73E9 (talk) 14:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

One specific research should not change our consensus, but 6.3333 out of 10 looks quite centrist to me! --Checco (talk) 07:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Since the nomination of Gabriel Attal, it is described as right-wing (not center-right) by almost all Journals in France. The party's self-description isn't important for this article, otherwise we would put left-conservatism in the infobox of BSW. 'European standards', or 'french standards' aren't clearly and officially defined. There are enough sources to change the infobox to center-right. The party also brands itself as progressive, although most english sources probably don't describe it that way at least since Macron defended Gérard Depardieu. There are reliable sources describing it as center-right. Encyclopédisme (talk) 10:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

In addition, other parties, with similar positions, are also described as center-right (The FDP for exemple). Encyclopédisme (talk) 10:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Checco:Sooo, can I go ahead and add the sourced content we’re talking about? Encyclopédisme (talk) 23:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Why not? There an "ideology" section for that. --Checco (talk) 12:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Great. Encyclopédisme (talk) 13:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

I propose the compromise of "Centre to centre-right", as is the case with Ensemble !. Economically, the party is very right-wing. GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 12:50, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I oppose that, while I would accept "centre-right". However, my favourite option is "centre". --Checco (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Your 'favorite option'? Really? Plus one for 'centre to centre-right'. And may I propose 'center-left to right-wing' which largely describes all courants of the party (this is waht's on fr.wiki). Encyclopédisme (talk) 16:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

I surely oppose "centre to centre-right" as I oppose the "xxxxx to xxxxx" format. --Checco (talk) 16:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

No it's Centre-Right by european standards. I live in France and am Franco-British, they are Centre-Right by European Standards and Centre-right to Right-wing by French Standards. Just recently the speaker of the house (who is part of Rennaissance) was elected thanks to votes from the right and far right. A lot of their social reforms have been considered "conservative" or "right-wing". Are there actually any french people on this chat page? Blaisethebest (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

That is quite weird. Talking about European standards, French parties tend to be more to the left on average. Even the RN holds social liberal positions on some issues that would make them more liberal than most centre-right parties in Europe. Really, Renaissance is centrist, by European standards. --Checco (talk) 19:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

No. Do not lecture me about my own country. The RN sit with the I.D group in the E.U parliament, the most rightwing group there is, so please do not think you know more, everything about them is far right. I think rennaissance should be labeled centre to centre-right. Another good example as to why that is: about 19/25 of the ministerial posts are occupied by former conservative mp's. Blaise Bnlk (talk) 20:25, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Centre to centre-right. We have multiple sources for centre-right: [1], [2], [3]. Helper201 (talk) 15:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Exactly! You are referring to French standards, not European ones. As I said and I really inteded to say that, all political parties in France are to the left of their counterparts in most countries, so that, for instance, the RN holds some socially liberal positions that would not be agreed by most EPP parties and even some PES ones (i.e. Italy's PD and Romania's PSD). --Checco (talk) 20:29, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Then, let's have "centre-right". I am for "centre" and nothing else, but I can accept that. The only option I oppose is "centre to centre-right". --Checco (talk) 05:21, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

What's your aversion to describing the position of a party as a spectrum? GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 10:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

This party is purely centrist, which is also described as a centre-left and centre-right party, exactly like the German FDP. The fact that the latter is currently described as a centre-right party on its Wikipedia page is what I consider to be a gross error, which does not take into account most sources. Let's not repeat the same mistake here too.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

I agree that Renaissance is a purely centrist party, with centre-right and centre-left tendencies. That is quite different anyway from Germanys' FDP, which is and has always and structurally been a centre-right party, on several issues to the right of the CDU. --Checco (talk) 05:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

I know this is off topic, but also the FDP, just like Renaissance, is a centrist party with both centre-right and centre-left tendencies (there are sources that explain this well)... I think both parties should be considered in the same way. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:51, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Read this article. They are centre-right by french and european standards, hence why they should be labled as centre to centre-right on their page. https://www.france24.com/en/20180506-france-centrist-emmanuel-macron-governs-right-wing-french-president Blaise Bnlk (talk) 17:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

I would Support either this or simply "centre-right" as long as the footnote remains (perhaps altered to include the "radical centre" description that fr.wiki includes). – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 01:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

They are labelled as far right by a vast majority of international news outlets and media. Have you read up about there stances on dual-citizenship? Or their stances on the EU membership? Or their stances on transgendre people? Or their stances on immigrants coming into France? Or their stances on education reforms? Or their stances on privatising state-media? Or privatising the health-care system? No you haven't. And renaissance have contributed to a lot of these ideas being put into place. Hence my saying they should be considered centre to centre right on their wikipedia page. Blaise Bnlk (talk) 22:24, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Again, that is not the point. French political parties and politics in general are to the left of their ideological counterparts. Even the RN is to the left of most of its counterparts on economic issues, the welfare, some social issues and so on. Renaissance is no exception: it is a liberal party that is quite centrist by European standards. I am glad that most users agree with me on Renaissance being a centrist party. This said, I also think that positions in party infoboxes are more confusing than useful and I would remove them altogether. --Checco (talk) 14:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it matters how the parties' positions compare to parties outside of the country, given the precedent set in Talk:Democratic Party (United States), the party's position as viewed from the perspective of people in the country is what matters more than how it sits on the international stage. Hence why the Democratic Party are listed as center-left while being to the right of most other centre-left parties in the world and particularly in Europe. Same goes for CHP in Turkey being to the right of parties like, say, Place Publique, but is still listed with the same position. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 05:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

Indeed. In French politics Renaissance is centrist and it is also centrist by European standards. --Checco (talk) 16:10, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

I favour the status quo with "Centre" in the position box, but a footnote listing fr.wiki's more descriptive position. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 16:12, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Changing the colour of the party

I would like to open a discussion as to what colour the party should be represented with in election-related data tables. The official, and current, colour used in their official logo is a dark navy blue and is what editors have been using when creating election boxes and data tables to present election results.

However, there are quite a few similar, darker colours used for the main political parties of France (RE, LR, RN & REC all use dark blue/black shades). As Renaissance has several other colours associated with it, a different colour could be agreed upon to use in place. To open the discussion, I would suggest one the following options:

Option 1: Revert back to the yellow ( ) used for La Republique En Marche!. Pros: already a fimilar colour in 2012-2017 election data tables & maps. Cons: not used anywhere in current Renaissance branding.
Option 2: Use the moderate blue ( ) colour from the official party website. Pros: closely follows the contemporary branding of the party. Cons: similar to LR's colour.
Option 3: Stay with the current colour ( ). Pros: matches the official logo. Cons: very similar to colours used for RN, LR & REC.

Into oblivion (talk) 05:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I would choose either Option 1 or 2 - I deteset the current colour. It's also almost completely indistinguishable from the RN or REC colours.

Into oblivion (talk) 05:12, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Let's keep yellow, as newspapers tend to identify the party and its coalition. --Checco (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

The current primary colour used on Wikipedia is not yellow - it is Option 3, dark navy. I would support returning the colour to yellow, as was the colour for Le Republique En Marche!.

Into oblivion (talk) 07:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Pinging recent contributors: @Joshuagaming12, @Checco, @Rh0809, @Blaisethebest, @David O. Johnson, @Moondragon21, @KlayCax, @Loytra.

It would be good to get a consensus about this asap, thanks.

Into oblivion (talk) 07:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I always thought the yellow was best as it is the most distinct. Moondragon21 (talk) 08:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

I have not changed my mind: yellow. --Checco (talk) 19:15, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

I agree. Yellow is more distinct, more utilized (alongside purple) when looking at graphics used by French media. Rh0809 (talk) 20:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm in favor of yellow as well for the same reasons. KlayCax (talk) 16:19, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

It seems that there is a clear majority for making the party color yellow. Should this now be put into effect? Rh0809 (talk) 23:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

It seems concensus has been reached! I'll make the change to the party's colour right away. Thanks all for your contributions.

Into oblivion (talk) 10:03, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

I live in France and practically every news channel and media represent them as yellow, so I vote yellow. Blaisethebest (talk) 10:59, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Colour of the party changed back to blue?

It seemed like there was a consensus above to change the colour to yellow, but it's back to blue again? Was this discussed elsewhere? ChristyMcMorrow (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Revert to yellow, common sense and bold edit that should be reverted – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 17:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

New position consensus

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

As a solution to an averted potential edit war, I'm opening up a new discussion on the party's position, pinging contributors from the old discussion. @Blaise Bnlk @Cherry @Checco @Helper201 @Scia Della Cometa & @Paul Vaurie. I affirm that the party can not be reasonably described as purely centrist due to its economic policies and the recent reliable sources describing it as either right-wing or centre-right (see above). An IP user cited a Chapel Hill survey that placed it in the same area as other countries' centre-right parties such as PSD, MR, and L, so I'd personally favour "Centre-right", but given the amount of sources describing it as centrist, I'd be willing to compromise for Centre to centre-right. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 04:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

@GlowstoneUnknown I think part of the issue is that Renaissance has never been a political party with a clear ideology. It's a gathering of people who support Emmanuel Macron : the party is structured around him. French people don't even talk about "Renaissance", they says "macronists". So Macron's own positioning affects Renaissance's positioning, leading some people to leave or join the party.

A indirect hint on Renaissance's positioning is that Edouard Phillipe (former PM of Macron) launched a centre-right party called Horizons. Horizons is basically Renaissance folks that don't want to be associated with Macron anymore. They do support Macron policies, but they won't always support Macron as a person. Based on this, Renaissance could be centre-right.

Another tendency in France is to class Renaissance as a "far-centrist" (which may not be radical centrist). "Far-centrism" has been coined by French historian Pierre Serna in 2005. It labels politics that brand themselves as "centrist", but won't accept dialogue and end up using violence (like during the Yellow vests protests) or authoritarian attitudes (Serna mentions Napoleon). Renaissance has been consistently called far-centrists by commentators.

I think that labeling Renaissance purely centrist is deceptive. Macronists have repeatedly said that only the most right-wing part of the center-left Socialist Party could joined them in a government. And most Renaissance folks now come from centre-right to right-wing parties. That's no mere center.

This said, I'd go for centre-right to right-wing or far-centrist.

Cherry (talk) 07:04, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I favor only Centre. Centre to centre right may be a decent compromise, but right-wing is absurd. Zlad! (talk) 07:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

That's a really interesting way to think about it, my only issues with "far-centrist" are its lack of an article to link to on en.wiki and the difficulty to narrow down its definition. Your "Centre-right to right-wing" isn't something I'm vehemently opposed to, but I feel like the balance of sources might make consensus-building for that position difficult, if it came down to it, would "centre-right" on its own be acceptable in your opinion? – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 07:49, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I think we can reach compromise on centre-right. Far-centrist ("extrême centre") is growingly accepted in France (see infobox on Renaissance (parti)), but the concept is only known in France for now. Cherry (talk) 08:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

I think that center-right to right-wing is appropriate. We rarely ever see policies advocated by Renaissance that are centrist, and they usually take a more conservative stance on issues like economics, immigration, etc. Egg470 (talk) 12:20, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

People saying "centre-right to right-wing" are just plain wrong. The main centre-right to right-wing party is The Republicans. Nobody in France recognizes Renaissance as a centre-right to right-wing party, neither historically nor now. Renaissance and The Republicans have some very distinctive policy differences, and we cannot say they have the same position on the spectrum. Their ideologies differ— one promotes liberal conservatism (LR) and the other liberalism (RE). This is completely absurd. I strongly oppose any mention of "right-wing" in the position, and will argue it to death if need be (hyperbole). I would favor Centre, but I can compromise at Centre to centre-right, like Zlad!. I think this is a fair middle that describes the main factions of the party, which are the centrist and the slighly conservative faction. Paul Vaurie (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

If we take a surface-level look at sourcing and the media, it's clear that Renaissance and Macron are usually described as "centrist" in 2024. No matter how much you disagree in your opinion, the reality is that if you don't cherry-pick your sources, you'll end up with this party being described as "centrist" most of the time and "centre-right" often but not enough to give it WP:UNDUE weight as the sole descriptor. Paul Vaurie (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Centre-right would be my vote, though I think centre to centre-right is better than just centre and would opt for this if it were a choice between only centre and centre to centre-right. This would however be my secondary choice, with simply centre-right as my primary vote. Helper201 (talk) 00:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

The problem with this discussion is that yall are forgetting one of the central ideas of Wikipedia: “verifiability, not truth”. The party is widely described as centrist doesn’t matter whether you consider them right-wing or not. If there are a good handful of quality sources describing them as centre-right as well I think its fine to change it to centre to centre right in the position section. Zlad! (talk) 09:21, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

@Zlad!: I assume this was a response to those calling the party right-wing. Paul Vaurie (talk) 20:45, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes Zlad! (talk) 20:49, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

While I do think mentioning "right-wing" somewhere in the article could potentially be worthwhile, I think putting it in the infobox could be difficult to justify as WP:DUE and thus much harder to achieve consensus for. I'd like to pose the same question I posed to Cherry before: if it came down to it, would you support "centre-right" alone in the infobox's position spot? (In my mind, this would also include the footnote where "right-wing" is mentioned as another label used for it) – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 06:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Centre to centre-right, or centre with a footnote saying the party has been denoted as centre-right as of recently. Perhaps akin to Five Star Movement. ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 12:48, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

I strongly oppose "centre to centre-right". While I would prefer "centre" pure and simple, I could accept "centre-right" as compromise. --Checco (talk) 05:41, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

@Checco: Why? Why so black and white? Paul Vaurie (talk) 00:56, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

It is not a matter of "black and white", but of the focus and meaning of the infobox. Indeed, infoboxes are very useful summaries, but little more than that. The article, especially the "idology" section, can contain all kinds of infos and nuances on the party, but infobox parameters — "ideology" and "position" should not be an exception — are intended to be short and clear. While I think that this party is more centrist than anything else, I stronly oppose monstre-definitions like "centre to centre-right" and choose "centre-right" instead. "Centr-right" already includes "centre"! Moreover, this party is not particularly big-tent: one position is enough. Otherwise, what are we going to do with catch-all parties: "far-left to far-right"? It is not a joke: the two big parties in the United States have long contained and, to some extent, have still very diverse internal positions—just think of the Democrats in the 1960s and 1970s! If it were for me, I would abolish the "position" parameter altogether because it is quite deceptive (every country has its spectrum) and causes too many discussions, but, as long as it is there, let's use it properly without unnecessarily bloating it. --Checco (talk) 09:08, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

I think positions are relatively useless if not misleading as well, but I strongly oppose removing them and making such a big change on a whim. I also oppose centre-right independently. Centre-right is just less frequently used than centre and I'm not sure there are enough reasons why it should be swapped. Centre to centre right I'm fine with, but centre is ideal imo. Zlad! (talk) 18:44, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

@Checco: After seeing what you wrote at Talk:The Republicans (France), it's becoming clear that you specifically just have a problem with the "position to position" format. You need to understand that this is widespread and accepted on Wikipedia. The party is described both as "centrist" and "centre-right" by a large chunk of sources; more say centrist, but a good amount say centre-right too. This simply calls for the solution that is being proposed: "centre to centre-right". There is nothing wrong with formatting a political position this way. It's not "too much" to read. Also, you need to understand that "centre" and "centre-right" are distinct political positions, and that some parties do exist between those positions, or including them both. Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:43, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

And just looking above, most people are fine with "centre to centre-right" as a compromise... Paul Vaurie (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

I think this is the best compromise. Zlad! (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't oppose it, as I said, but I'd just like to do a "head count" first of editors who want "centre-right" alone vs editors who want "centre to centre-right" before implementing a change and closing the discussion. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:05, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

@Paul Vaurie after my headcount, it looks like there are more primarily in favour of "Centre-right" alone:

User:GlowstoneUnknown, User:Cherry, User:Helper201, User:80.187.72.156, (myself and Helper201 have expressed willingness to compromise on "Centre to centre-right" however)

but if it helps consensus go through, I'd be willing to support "Centre to centre-right" if it means the discussion is closed in a timely fashion. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Well, I prefer Centre as I said, although as compromise I see Centre to Centre Right as valid. Additionally, I’m not sure headcount is exactly what you should be looking at. It is a factor, but the sources are what should have more weight and it will show a picture of a party being more widely described as Centrist therefore excluding is something I am strongly against. Zlad! (talk) 00:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

As I said, if the discussion is speedily closed, I'd support "Centre to centre-right" in order to reach consensus, the only thing I'm strongly opposed to is excluding "Centre-right" from the infobox's position parameter. And while I'd personally prefer Centre-right alone, Centre to centre-right seems like a suitable compromise that won't be opposed by most contributors in this discussion. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:30, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

I support this. Zlad! (talk) 00:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Alright, @Paul Vaurie @Helper201 @80.187.72.156 (BTW, please register an account), shall we close the discussion and implement the change? – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 04:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Sure. Centre to centre-right works. Paul Vaurie (talk) 05:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

If we were to add all positions and ideologies that are sourced, both parameteres would be stuffed with long lists of ideologies and positions. As we always discuss on ideologies in order to have a reasonable number of them — never all of them — in the "ideology" parameter, we should do the same with "position". --Checco (talk) 14:31, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

You've completely ignored WP:UNDUE. Paul Vaurie (talk) 17:26, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Centre-right, maybe centre-left to right-wing. If only one position is taken, centre-right, but that just seems like a caricature to me. The party has some mildly centre-left elements and has a "right-wing" majority. Note that in France, simple 'standard' right-wing is explicitly different from far-right, and simple 'standard' left-wing is different from far-left. Centre-left means left-wing anyways, and centre-right means right-wing, instead of meaning centrist. The NFP alliance was often described as far-left by foreign media, that is no reason to label it far-left. In fact the far-left label in that case resulted from a lack of information. Macron more or less allied with LR, the right-wing party (note right-wing means not far-right). English Wikipedia calls LR centre-right to right-wing, but French Wikipedia clearly has right-wing only (which does not mean far-right). So centre-right or centre-left to right-wing. 80.187.72.156 (talk) 19:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't do 'position to position' formats that skip a position (like centre-left to right-wing; you've just skipped centre and centre-right). In that case some kind of footnote is used and a position in the middle is chosen. Next, a lot of the sources call it "centrist", which means "centre" (not centre-right), and a decent amount of the sources call it "centre-right" (which means centre-right, not right-wing, not both centre and right-wing at the same time, but centre-right, a distinct position).
And no, "centre-left" does NOT mean "left-wing", nor does "centre-right" mean "right-wing". That is quite simply not the case. Paul Vaurie (talk) 21:24, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Then centre-right, with the current footnote. I was talking about common usage in French. A "centre-gauche" party is, as you probably know, a party "de gauche", and a "centre-droit" party is a party "de droite". In other countries (Germany), centre-right and centre-left are part of a wider centre, with the 'right' and 'left' being the extremes. 80.187.86.202 (talk) 06:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

You're complicating things way too much. Just follow the sourcing. Paul Vaurie (talk) 06:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

As a native English speaker, I would refer to a centre-right party as "on the right" or "to the right of ____", same goes for "on the left" and "centre-left", but they're still distinct positions. To use a local example, the Australian Labor Party is a party I'd describe as "on the left" or "to the left of the Liberals", but a "left-wing party" they are not, they hold moderate and catch-all positions on a lot of issues in order to win elections. The only major party over here that I'd describe as "left-wing" is the Australian Greens, who are committed to left-wing policies on social and economic issues and scrutinise the other major party on the left, Labor, for their moderate policies which they assert aren't radical enough. – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 06:58, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

That isn't how the political spectrum as a concept operates.-- Autospark (talk) 18:18, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

I think you'll find it is – GlowstoneUnknown (Talk) 00:00, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

My position is that it should be centre or centre-right, with a preference for the former. No tautological descriptions (which the abomination "centre to centre-right" would be). Most of the description (and wider nuance) should be left to the "Ideology" section. Keep Infoboxes for their intended purposes.-- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Autospark (talk • contribs) 18:22, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

@Autospark: In what way is this an abomination? We use "position to position" format very commonly on Wikipedia. You can see it on Conservative Party (UK), Republican Party (United States), The Republicans (France), Socialist Party (France), The Ecologists, and I could just go on...
And if you think that "centre to centre-right" specifically is an abomination, well, it's also frequently used. Renew Europe and Ensemble (political coalition) use it, two political coalitions that Renaissance is a part of. Paul Vaurie (talk) 05:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with User:Autospark, obviously. Please let me add that something that is frequently used in Wikipedia might be a mistake and should not automatically become a source or a matter of comparison. Also the IP has quite some good points: I also think, consistently with User:Autospark, that position here should be "centre" (the party has also centre-left factions), but I would accept "centre-right" as compromise. I am glad that three individual users are now in favour of just "centre". --Checco (talk) 11:15, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Ps / To the IP user: please register an account so that you can become a regular contributor.

You're going to have to get wider consensus that this is an inappropriate practice before maintaining that it should be used nowhere on Wikipedia. This argument doesn't hold up. Paul Vaurie (talk) 20:22, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Again, I personally favor centre, and as a compromise, centre to centre-right, but absolutely *not* centre-right alone.
It literally makes no sense to support centre or centre-right but not what's in between. Paul Vaurie (talk) 20:23, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Then again, there are centre-left elements, while the party has moved considerably to the right since its founding. So what exactly speaks against centre-left to right-wing? If it is really important to mention all positions used in sources, then centre-left to right-wing seems like the correct option, more than centre to centre-right. And the "__to__" format seems very clear, it contains centre-left to right-wing elements. It is not "centre-left and right-wing", it's centre-left to right-wing. If it isn't that important, then centre-right seems accurate by now as the general positioning, but again, "centre-left to right-wing" would mention every courant. 80.187.102.51 (talk) 10:50, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is not how it is done on the English Wikipedia. In a case where a party is truly so across the board, it would typically be described as "big tent" by sources. If there are major factions that are very different, a footnote is used. We never do "centre-left to right-wing". Nevermind that Renaissance isn't even "right-wing", even if occasionally described as droite (meaning political right) in some opinion pieces. Paul Vaurie (talk) 19:29, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I do not know why and how anyone decided to close the talk (morever this was not a RfC). However, it is interesting to observe that the majority of users involved or at least half of them in the discussion stated their preference for "centre", not to mention the interesting insights of the IP user. --Checco (talk) 20:07, 18 September 2024 (UTC)