Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of conservative political parties by country

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. Sandstein 05:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of conservative political parties by country

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Original research. There are no sources for the article and sources may group these parties differently. TFD (talk) 11:22, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I am sure there are sources for each party that say it is conservative. A list set up this way is not unreasonable. Having said (and "voted") that, I have a strong feeling that at least part of the reason the list exists is to put major political parties (let me guess the Republicans in the USA and Likud in Israel) on the same page with a collection of far-right extremist groups. The effect this will have in the real world: Just about zero. Kitfoxxe (talk) 14:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This appears to be a well-done list. Inclusion criteria is a bit sketchy and it should be tagged for sources, but this appears thoughtful and well done and will be a boon as a navigational device. Examining precedent, we have had lists of socialist parties without incident, some of which disagree with the others hugely. Conservatism takes different forms in different countries, just like the concept of socialism does. Carrite (talk) 15:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I was looking up List of socialist parties by way of example and found it redirects to Socialist International. Here's what I was looking for: List of communist parties. Carrite (talk) 15:16, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also List of social democratic parties. I now await the first shriek of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, to which I note, I'm not making the OTHERSTUFF argument that "this list is more useful than List of Pokémon characters." THAT'S an OTHERSTUFF argument. Let's look at the way Wikipedia has dealt with like lists, shall we? Carrite (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the parties listed, while center-right, are not conservative, but are normally classified as liberal, Christian Democratic, right-wing populist, etc. According to the Conservatism article, which uses Klaus von Beyme's categorization of political parties, there are only 12 conservative parties remaining in Europe, yet the list includes almost 50. TFD (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:36, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks sources, historical perspective or any clear idea of what a conservative party is. For example, the Republican Party is listed for the USA. This is the party of Abraham Lincoln. Is this a radical party because it freed the slaves or a conservative party because it fought for the Union? Or consider the current ruling party in China which is communist in name but quite conservative in nature. The topic lacks any credibility and is contrary to all our core policies of WP:NPOV, WP:V, WP:OR. Warden (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Agree with Kit & Carrite: inclusion critera needs tightening, and easy enough to find sources. Beyme's definition is certainly relevant, but reliable sources take precedence. Lionel (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you name any reliable sources and why you think that Von Beyme's Political parties in western democracies is unreliable? TFD (talk) 02:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't write that Beyme was "unreliable." To the contrary, I wrote that he is relevant. Lionel (talk) 04:49, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMed^talk _stalk 01:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blank and start over while such a list certainly could be created and verified, the current list offers no references to show it they are conservative, by what measure they are conservative, and in which era they are conservative. Per remarks by Col.Warden, the Republican Party of Lincoln's time was not conservative, but social democratic, being the abolitionist party. Further, several non-conservative parties have become conservative, and vice versa, so a time period needs to be specified. And "conservative" is in the eye of the beholder. We should only list parties that are considered conservative by their own regions in which they operate, not by outside measures. The Democratic Party of the USA would be considered conservative in Europe, but is not considered so in the USofA. 65.94.47.63 (talk) 04:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing is not a problem. Each entry in the list has its own article and ample sources at the article to establish it's conservative. Your other issues could be addressed by tweaking the inclusion criteria, e.g. "Current conservative parties," and/or breaking out into a section e.g."==Historical conservative parties==". These are cleanup issues, not notability issues. – Lionel ^(talk) 07:04, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blank and start over as List of self-described conservative political parties. Being conservative is in the eye of the beholder (per 65.94.47.63) so wikipedians can't make that judgment call and there's not an official body we can defer to, so we have to fall back on self-description. Stuartyeates (talk) 05:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.