Talk:Swiss People's Party

message: "Some believed ..."
"most of the foreign residents in Switzerland are criminals, murderers and rapists."
"symbolizing the criminal alien invader"
"Some felt ..."
All weasel words and POV. All deleted. Jamiem 10:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Instead of really illustrating the ideology of the SVP, this section deals with two current headline hitting debates. It should be renamed in "Debates 2007" or something like that - otherwise it's completly useless. --62.203.7.33 16:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideology 

message: According to the SVP's website Samuel Schmid is a "former" council and the new council is not even mentioned. Should the two still be listed or maybe removed as it seems to be the "official" policy of SVP now. Santoki (talk) 14:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Both Councillors are members of the SVP as a party, even though they are not officially members of the SVP parliamentary group anymore. Note that the SVP's website is not a third party source, and thus not an ideal source (see WP:SOURCES). Schutz (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Members of the Swiss Federal Council 

message: People are getting over WW2, thank god!58.107.183.15 (talk) 10:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cool. 

message: Merrymouse re-added quite a lot of content that was previously removed by Schutz as "too much detail, not directly connected to the party, and slightly POV"; the source Merrymouse gives is a Financial Times article which, however, doesn't reflect wholly how the voting out of Blocher is seen in Switzerland. "There therefore now exists in Swiss government a situation which seems to represent the collapse, at least temporarily, of the Concordance system which has been in operation since the Second World War, and to represent a sea-change in the nature of Swiss parliamentary relations, from one based on consensus and trust to one based more on confrontation." - well, there are on the other hand Swiss politicians who said quite the opposite, that the system of a consensus-based Federal Council could be strengthened by the removal of the disruptive element that Blocher brought into the Council, if the SVP after their initial anger finally should accept Widmer-Schlumpf as one of their Federal Council members. Widmer-Schlumpf and Schmid are still members of the party although excluded from the parliamentary group of which as members of the Federal Council they never were real members anyway (but they are excluded from the meetings now). There is talk of excluding them also from the party itself; however, this seems to be difficult because usually only the respective cantonal party (in their case Bern and Graubünden) can exclude members, it probably can't be done from the level of the national party. In Switzerland, party members are members of their respective cantonal party, which in turn is a member of the national party. And the cantonal parties of Schmid and Widmer-Schlumpf aren't going to exclude them; therefore there is even talk about excluding the Bern and Graubünden SVP from the Swiss SVP entirely. I will try to add something to reflect this in the article, but will have to cite German-language sources. Gestumblindi (talk) 01:59, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Things aren't as simple 

message: This is what it looked like when I first landed on the page:  Political ideology Conservatism,National conservatism,Economic liberalism, Agrarianism,Isolationism,NationalismRight-wing populism.
Note the singular of Political ideology.--Pan Miacek (t) 14:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Anti-immigration is a form of political ideology, and we even have an article about it, namely nativism. There are lots of reliable sources that characterize the party's position as anti-immigration, I just picked a random one. See a googlenews search for lots more, e.g. from Seattle Times, called "Swiss reward anti-immigrant People's Party". These are not "conjectural things" but terms commonly used by numerous reliable sources to describe the party. They belong in the article and the infobox; the details of the anti-immigrant stance of the party can be discussed in the article itself. If you are still not convinced, we can do a third-opinion request or even an RfC. Nsk92 (talk) 14:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've started working on the article; you can freely request whatever you like. I'm translating some stuff from de wiki, as the article there is much larger and has some scholarly sources, too.PS. QED: “e.g. from Seattle Times, called "Swiss reward anti-immigrant People's Party".” - a random piece you found from an American newspaper will not serve as a reliable source. There are surely many newspapers, say, in German media, that still call the party a centrist-conservative alliance of farmers and artisans. Otherwise, we may soon reach something like this:  :O.     --Pan Miacek (t) 15:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Err, since when is Seattle Times not a reliable source? And once again, this was just an example to illustrate that the party is commonly described by newspapers as being anti-immigration. In fact, their anti-immigration stance is probably the single most defining issue this party is known for, both nationally and internationally. It is more informative than most of the other terms and belongs in the infobox. I'll take this to WP:3O but please stop making significant changes to the article until this dispute is resolved. Nsk92 (talk) 15:35, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this dispute about some utterances in the infobox should prevent users from improving this article. Seattle Times is just a newspaper, just like the ones that a certain user found here. You must either prove that there is a consensus in the public or some academic consensus that the defining characteristic of the SVP is really this anti-immigration ideology, or just add your newspaper coverage into the main text. It is definitely easy to prove that the party's ideology is conservative, but other notions are not so easy to source. Besides, I would appreciate your comment on my parallel (perhaps an unmerited one?) to 'United Russia dispute'. --Pan Miacek (t) 16:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not familiar with the particulars of the United Russia dispute and do not have any opinion about it. But I do have an opinion about this article. I claim that there is in fact a consensus among traditional news-sources in describing the Swiss National Party as an anti-immigration one. Seattle Times article was just an example, but there are lots more . As I said, since the party's anti-immigration stance is a defining feature of its platform and of its notability, it belongs in the infobox. If you do need academic articles arguing the same point regarding this party, here is an example. Nsk92 (talk) 17:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: And here is another example, also from an a academic article, taken from this googlebooks search. Nsk92 (talk) 17:26, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The infobox should reflect the contents of the article. Anti-immigration as an ideology should be covered there, preferably by using academic sources. Your article to Seattle Times is useless in this respect: by now, I have read it through. It just mentions one time the word anti-immigration and explains (without any depth of analysis) that SVP won the election on a platform that promised reduction in immigration and tough punishments against immigrant criminals. But google.books is a way forward, I agree. --Pan Miacek (t) 17:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: One more thing: I believe that the word 'anti-immigration' is in most cases you referred to just an epithet (a derogatory one, some people might want to argue): 'the anti-immigrant SVP', 'the far-left Die Linke' etc. I did maintain Right-wing populism in the article, as this is not so controversial. Opposition to further immigration can be viewed within the wider framework of the above mentioned ideology (which, controversial as it may be, is at least an ideology).--Pan Miacek (t) 17:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I do not wish to argue semantics and dictionary definitions of "ideology" here. I think the purpose of the infobox is to summarize the most relevant information about the party, including its core political beliefs, of which opposition to immigration is certainly one, in fact probably the most important one (and the one the party is most known for). While the term "ideology" may not be the best one, a note on the anti-immigration aspect of the party's platform certainly belongs in the infobox, IMO. Nsk92 (talk) 19:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

text: As I said, I think it is a mistake to concentrate too narrowly on the definition of the word "ideology" but to think about the basic purpose of having an infobox in the first place. To me an infobox should summarize the most important facts about whatever subject the article is on (in this case a political party). It seems rather incongruous to me that there is a place in the infobox to mention that the party's color is dark green but there is no place to mention that anti-immigration stance is a defining feature of the party's platform. Nsk92 (talk) 20:48, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree on the fact that the purpose of the infobox is to summarize the most relevant information about the party, including its core political beliefs (read: ideology). Anyway I don't think that "anti-immigration" is an ideology, while nativism is. I would personally leave only "conservatism" and "national conservatism" (the two ideologies on which we all agree), while I would leave out "right-wing populism". I would add also "economic liberalism", but I understand Miacek's concerns, even if I would say that a sort of protectionism characterizes most Swiss parties, including the Liberals. --Checco (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I can agree with that. --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 22:24, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we leave only "conservatism" and "national conservatism"? --Checco (talk) 23:20, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support this. --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 09:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

text: What is the problem with right-wing populism? It is an ideology, isn't it? Nsk92 (talk) 13:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've no objection to including both national conservatism (a subset of conservatism, which does not require additional mention) and right-wing populism.  Sandstein  13:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I simply wouldn't use "right-wing populism": it is an ideology, but I don't think it's appropriate for SVP. --Checco (talk) 14:26, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox. 

message: Yesterday and the day before an IP edited the article and later on my friend Miacek reverted all his/her edits, telling that the new text needed references. It is true that there was a problem of sources and the article chronically deserve to be sourced, but as almost everything the IP added or changed was correct, I will revert Miacek's revert. We could probably put all the "fact" tags where are needed and ask the IP and other users to improve the article, but I don't think that a total rollback is the right thing to do, especially when most of the infos he/she included are correct, verifiable and probably taken from the article in de.Wiki. I hope that Miacek will agree with me. --Checco (talk) 17:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: What was done the other day is that the entire article was modified, modelled and re-edited based on the same article on the Swiss People's Party in German-language, de.wikipedia. Please don't take me wrongly, as I'm a Swiss citizen from Zurich, understand the German text on the Swiss People's Party clearly, and have tried to translate the english article on the Swiss People's Party. Thank you, Checco, for your cooperation in terms of helping this article to be sourced. Nonetheless, just because someone else's genuine factual information-containing edit lacked references and sources, it isn't justified to delete the edit entirely. If you know German and read the introduction, some parts (overview) section of the history section, and the "Policies" section on both the english and german articles about the Swiss People's Party, you will find out that they have been translated. It's difficult for me to get english sources and references for the english article on the SVP. However, the IP address's edit is verifiable from the article in de.Wiki. Again, Checco, thank you for your help in trying to further reference and source this article. I also hope that Miacek would cooperate in terms of inserting "fact tags" where needed, and also in terms of further trying to reference and source this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.120.37.181 (talk) 03:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits by an IP 

message: Describing the party as "conservative" is a cop-out, and incompatible with WP:NPOV. For example, a Google News search gives more than twice as many results for "far-right-swiss-people's-party" as for "conservative-swiss-people's-party." Actually, the most results by far come from "right-wing-swiss-people's-party." Maybe "right-wing" is an acceptable compromise? 69.159.62.160 (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Far-right 

message: Can someone well-versed in this make a section about this.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.79.9.129 (talk) 21:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009 Minaret referendum

message: This is indeed WP:UNDUE, and probably shows more about the general disorientation and decline within the SVP than anything actually related to "foreign policy".
To have the article state that 
:While the proposal was met with ridicule in the German embassy in Bern, a poll conducted by the Swiss weekly Weltwoche showed that 63% of Germans, Italians and Austrians in the border regions were in favour of joining Switzerland.
is also misleading, as the Weltwoche is for all practical purposes simply an SVP propaganda tool, and anything "revealed" in the Weltwoche can simply be taken as part of SVP strategy. 
It would be more instructive to show how sources unrelated to the SVP reacted to this, but then this is just a silly season item anyway. 
Apart from the SVP clowning around,  discussion of "border regions willing to join Switzerland" as a serious topic should go to Alemannic separatism. --dab (𒁳) 12:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Greater Switzerland"

message: I live in Switzerland and I never heard any newspaper portraying the party as far right. Could you please explain me how this can be considered as such?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.207.85 (talk) 20:29, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  SVP far right? 

message: The party is not conservative! It's a nationalist, liberal and feminist party which tries to be a catch-all party. Anti-feminists and masculists are not allowed to be members of it. --212.186.0.108 (talk) 08:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Not even one of the Swiss newspapers, or any other media, would agreee with you; not even their own paper, the "Weltwoche". "The exception confirms the rule". -- ZH8000 (talk) 22:46, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course not. They're right-wing populist and won't admit that they aren't conservative in truth. But why do you cite newspapers? We need neutral sources (and I've given you one). You seem to be out of arguments and simply defend the SVP or hide their real face. Why? The party is national liberal and feminist. --212.186.0.108 (talk) 08:58, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Aw, as I see another user already attempted to change it. Well, there are also two sources which state the SVP is national liberal. Simply look and stop your edit war! --P. Romanus (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

text: The given citation says exactely the opposite of your totally unfounded, if not ridiculous claims. Skenderovic, 2009, p. 124: "... and prefers to use terms such as 'national-conservative' or 'conservative-right' in defining the SVP. In particular, 'national-conservative' has gained prominance among the definitions used in Swiss research on the SVP". qed. – So, now stop your obvious lame game for the sake of the seriousness of the encyclopedia. Everybody will thank you for this. -- ZH8000 (talk) 22:20, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "National conservative" 

message: I live in Switzerland and I never heard any newspaper portraying the party as far right. Could you please explain me how this can be considered as such? I think that some users are changing the terminonlgy withouth knowing it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.207.85 (talk) 00:48, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Pull your head out of the sand and read real news from time to time, your monumental ignorance is not notable to the standards of this encyclopedia. Fact is far right parties are always trying to present themselves as somehow moderate, I challenge you to present to me a single far right neo-fascist party in Europe where idiots on the discussion forum aren't desperately trying to argue that it's not really right wing at all even though it wants to hang every brown person from a tree. It's truly pathetic and you're a fool if you don't think what you're doing is as obvious as daylight.2601:140:8900:1765:2442:A37F:BD70:882 (talk) 03:12, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh dear. Another loon. Sumorsǣte (talk) 07:50, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Sumorsǣte. Also, Wikipedia is not the place for political commentary. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:05, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Good grief, ZH8000, do I have to go through line by line and word by word what's wrong with the edits by the anonymous editor?? Seriously?! The edits are clearly the wording of a deranged or brainwashed hater and have no factual basis and are clearly biased to a very narrow (and as I said, deranged/brainwashed) point of view. Sumorsǣte (talk) 08:10, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, it might not be so obvious if you don't follow Swiss politics, which I do (from a 'general' perspective) — I'll briefly go through the first two parts of the edits to demonstrate: it is not immigration per se that the party is opposed to, it is 'mass' immigration (ie the freedom of movement which Switzerland has with the rest of Europe through its bilateral relationship with the EU); it is not that "residents" are proposed to be able to be deported (citizens who are resident cannot be deported, in any circumstance, for example) but specifically foreign residents who have committed certain crimes (ie as it is now, but lowering the level of seriousness of the crimes, etc). Sumorsǣte (talk) 08:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the original wording was neutral and of a higher quality, and that the wording added by the IP was POV. Also, specifically regarding the SVP's stance on mass migration, it's not opposed to all immigration, as seen in the fact that it opposed a November 2014 referendum to limit immigration to CH to 0.2% of the population every year. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:41, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Oh, nice try there thinking we wouldn't notice the sly editing. Sumorsǣte (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Just wanted to voice support for the OP. In Switerland's French part, I've never heard the party being described as far-right (at least by mainstream media), i.e. extrême-droite in French. The difference between the SVP and other similar parties in Europe (National Front, FPÖ, Vlaams Belang, etc.) is that it does not come from a radical/nationalist background.  — Orgyn (talk) 19:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: In WWII "sections of party officials and farmers voiced sympathy with, or failed to distance themselves from the emerging fascist movements". 92.18.127.206 (talk) 06:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Right - wing  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Swiss People's Party. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151019115107/http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-polls_election-2015-results-in-graphics/41612374 to http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-polls_election-2015-results-in-graphics/41612374
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141104192233/http://www.slatkine.com/fr/editions-slatkine/68201-book-07210607-9782832106075.html to http://www.slatkine.com/fr/editions-slatkine/68201-book-07210607-9782832106075.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:11, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: How can an ALDE party be "far-right"? --85.249.41.164 (talk) 15:59, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: True, the vast majority of sources label the SVP as "right-wing," rather than "far-right," and many of the latter are only passing mentions. I recommend we add a note similar to what appears here, where "right-wing" is the main descriptor, but there's still a note at the bottom of the infobox stating that some sources have described the SVP as "far-right." --1990'sguy (talk) 18:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Far-right" 

message: I propose the follow shall only be in the ideology parametre in the infobox:
*Agrarianism
*National conservatism
*Economic liberalism
*Right-wing populism
*Euroscepticism
ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 12:21, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reduction of Ideologies 

message: SantiagoFrancoRamos did so, because apparently Reuters et al. is leftist... a ton of sources have that description, that I've just compiled (although a lot of others also omit 'far', which is why I suppose both should be included... but I'm certainly not saying they're necessarily biased). Also, due to the footnote being deleted there's a broken link to it in the infobox, but the edit couldn't be undone, so if most agree Reuters isn't leftist... 92.18.127.206 (talk) 09:54, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The descriptors are still in the article. Per several discussions above, "far-right" can be in the article, but as a footnote. Based on those discussions, this is partially because that descriptor isn't used in domestic Swiss media, but only some international outlets. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Why did you agree with someone who merely used an insult? 92.18.127.206 (talk) 06:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnote removed