Template talk:Political parties in the Republic of Ireland

message: Could User:Padraig3uk please explain why he insists on removing Republican Sinn Féin from this list. While we all know that RSF is not registered with the Registrar of Political Parties at Dáil Éireann, it is equally clear that RSF does contest elections, even though the party name does not appear on the ballot paper. There has been extensive debate on the same issue and along the same lines over RSF's inclusion in the Northern Ireland Assembly election, 2007 results. On that page, common sense prevailed and RSF is now listed in the results, even though the organisation is not registered with the relevant electoral commission. 
May I remind Padraig3uk that Wikipedia is not bound by the legal definitions of any particular state, nor is it a space for petty political squabbles between those who contest the name of Sinn Féin.--Damac 20:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with having RSF or any other unregistered group the problem is we would end up with a very big template if we  added them all.--padraig3uk 23:24, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the template is for political parties in the Republic of Ireland. I don't think the template would burst if we were to include all the parties that at least stand for election, even if only occasionally.--Damac 04:29, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: RSF

message: An editor has expressed concern that there is no clear inclusion or exclusion criteria for the minor parties section of this template. So perhaps we should discuss some criteria. Until this discussion is over, please do not remove any material from the template. A good place to start would be to get a list of all parties registered at Leinster House. I can't find a copy online, can anyone help? Another criterion would be parties that have contested an election, whether described as non party or not. Some groups in the list do not appear to have contested election, e.g. eirigi. Snappy (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, please do not remove sections from the established consensus version (of 4 years). I know consensus can change, but let's discuss it first. Snappy (talk) 06:58, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The WP:CONSENSUS is very clear that all content meets WP:V Fasach Nua (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed so. So why did you remove the Socialist Party (Ireland) then, since this is obviously and easily verifiable? Please refrain from such removal until the merits of each entry has been discussed. Snappy (talk) 07:20, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The WP:BURDEN is on the individual who added/restored the content to justify the inclusions and the exclusions, the tag should remain until the template meets WP:V Fasach Nua (talk) 07:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have anything to add to this discussion besides pointing out wikipedia guidelines and demanding that other editors provide verifiability? Any chance you might do some work yourself on the subject and go find some citations? Snappy (talk) 07:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Sounds reasonable, I would prefer a different wording than 'other', maybe "no label" and wikilink to the concept? Fasach Nua (talk) 13:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, though I'd prefer "Non Party" but either that or "No label" and linked. Also, I haven't included Immigration Control Platform and Irish Socialist Network, because although they did contest the 2007 election (as Non Party) as I cannot verify if these groups are still active. I've left Éirígí in but since they don't appear to be registered or contest elections, they could be removed. Anyone know if they are contesting the local elections? They appear to be more a political group/campaign rather than a party. Snappy (talk) 13:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor parties 

message: I undid the page move and reverted the page back to the last version by Larry Mafi. If any editor want to make changes, they should either now discuss them here or wait for WP:IECOLL to finish.MITH 10:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop using WP:IECOLL as an excuse for everytime some makes changes you don't like. There already is a :Template:Political parties in Northern Ireland, so I moved this template in order to make it less confusing. Snappy (talk) 05:37, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Per Wikipedia:ICONDECORATION and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Icons#Do_not_use_subnational_flags_without_direct_relevance. They should be removed Gnevin (talk) 10:18, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Subnational flags is irrelevant here. Per IconDecoration that is subjective and if interpreted strictly, could there is no need for icons anywhere. Please give me an example of where an icon is permitted and is not decorative? Snappy (talk) 18:50, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I meant Wikipedia:ICONDECORATION#Do_not_emphasize_nationality_without_good_reason. Six_Nations_Championship and Battle_of_the_Bulge Gnevin (talk) 10:37, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I still don't understand, how is Six Nations a good example? It mixes subnational flags, national flags and an sporting organisation flag all together, surely it would be better if there were no icons here, it would be just a list of participating countries. As for the Battle of the Bulge, a Nazi flag next to Hitler, what is the point of that?! Snappy (talk) 19:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not going to discuss the wiki wide application of the MOS here Gnevin (talk) 20:05, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to me that your are interpreting (a vague and confusing) mos to suit your own pov. Snappy (talk) 20:11, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If you disagree with MOSICON you should attempt to make it less vague and confusing Gnevin (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Flags

message: I am inserting the Christian Democrats. There's no reason that they alone of registered parties shouldn't be on this. They haven't contested any recent elections, but neither have the Communist Party. They campaigned against the Children's referendum, so do exist, however small. --William Quill (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christian Democrats 

message: Need to confirm numbers after defections to Aontú https://twitter.com/Toibin1/status/1089849775548219393 Bogger (talk) 13:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Aontú councillors

message: I don't see any reason why parties like the IRSP or other minor parties with no elected reps aren't on this template. Especially since the template is displayed on the IRSP's article itself. I can see there was discussion about it further up the talk page in 2009 but I'll give it a week and if there's no disagreements I'll update the template with more fleshed out list. lijkel (talk) 12:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: My own thought (as per the related inclusion criteria discussions at Talk:List of political parties in the Republic of Ireland) is that the inclusion criteria for this template is best limited to those parties which have registered to contest elections and/or have elected representation in the Republic of Ireland. The IRSP doesn't meet this criteria (not being registered to contest elections or having local/national/EU reps). Otherwise any loosely affiliated political grouping (that has never contested an election, not registered to contest any election, and has never seen a member elected to anything/anywhere) could be included in the template. Making it almost infinitely open. Guliolopez (talk) 14:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah no worries. Cheers for that, makes sense. lijkel (talk) 09:39, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Over at Template:Political_parties_in_the_United_Kingdom, we worked out specific inclusion criteria. You might find those interesting. Bondegezou (talk) 11:32, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Much appreciated. Will take a look. Guliolopez (talk) 15:37, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any thoughts on adding more parties to this template box?