Talk:Socialist Party (Netherlands)

message: The introduction is very bad. It uses too much abbreviations and some are not even explain (what is KEN(ml))?
:It is explained, it means Communist Unity Movement of the Netherlands (marxist-leninist). I'll try to rework it further, and make a nice history paragraph. Qwertyus 03:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Qwertyus, I've been working on a radical revision of this article, giving the article the same structure as the GroenLinks article. So please wait until I've made that revision (which I will make before this afternoon), so I won't overlook your changes. Thanks!  C mon 07:27, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice work. I can see were you got your inspiration ;) Qwertyus 21:42, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: This suggestions is entirely related to language
and in no way a comment on the content of the article.
Can the following sentence,
"In 1999 it one member was elected into the European Parliament,"
be edited to,
"In 1999 one of its members was elected into the European Parliament."
without altering the intended meaning?
Thank you for your kindness,
- Rockthing 05:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "After 1994" sentence structure proposal 

message: The part about the organizational structure states that the party board convenes at least four times a year. As far as I know it is at least once every four years.
Codegrinder 23:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: at least four times a year?

message: There are right-wing people trying to put in changes in this article, turning it into a political article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.236.1.197 (talk) 16:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The SP is not a populist party, yes you can find some stupid sources that says the party is populist. But there are a lot more sources which says it is not a populist party. A good source: https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/18124/MA-2011-TJdenHollander.pdf?sequence=1 --LLTSU (talk) 06:32, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Populism" in infobox 

message: I've changed the lead and infobox to state that the SP is a social democratic party. There are two sources for this, a statement by SP MP Harry van Bommel (primary source) and a piece in New Left Review (secondary source). I know that in the Dutch context "social democratic" tends to mean "the stance of the PvdA", but it's no use labeling the SP as democratic socialist, a phrase that I've never encountered in literature by or about the SP. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 19:28, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Socialism vs. social democracy 

message: The article states that the SP is critical of immigration. The party was opposed to mass immigration in their earlier days (as stated in their text "Gastarbeid en kapitaal" (guest workers and capital).
However, this position has changed. They accept refugees (their site says that it is a moral obligation because the party stands for solidarity) and aren't that critical anymore of immigration as they used to be. 
I'd say that their view on this issue is more complex than the article states.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FreeSoftwareEnthousiast (talk • contribs) 19:06, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed that. "Critical of immigration" is so vague that it's nearly meaningless. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 20:58, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideology and issues - Immigration 

message: Please note that the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung is closely related to the Social Democratic Party of Germany.Freise M. (2010) Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. In: Anheier H.K., Toepler S. (eds) International Encyclopedia of Civil Society. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-93996-4_754 Considering this close relation of the FES and the SPD, and considering the subject of this report, namely European political opponents of the SPD (such as Die Linke and the Socialistische Partij), I will have removed the claim ('far-left') associated with this source. - Krmody (talk) 02:30, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , I agree. There are enough sources in support for plain left-wing, including an academic book (Magone 2013). It may have been considered far-left in the past but it has changed, and being to the left of the PvDa does not entail the party being far-left, which unlike far-right has no clear definition, other than "leftier than thou." There is this IP who insist in adding far-left just because they cherry picked a source. Too bad two news sources just say left-wing and an academic book describe it as left-wing and outlines its evolution from Maoism to democratic socialism/social-democracy. They say "Your personal opinion on 'cherry-picking' is invalid. A reliable source says it, and you did not back up your claim otherwise." This is exactly what cherry picking is, i.e. "[a] [single] reliable source says it [is]." So no, my charge is valid, and I did back my claim by pointing there are two reliable news sources who just say left-wing, and more importantly there is an academic book (academic books and journals are way better than news sources) support left-wing and actually says, "Several smaller left-wing parties ... Dutch Socialist Party ... has moderated its ideology towards democratic socialism." Every party has a moderate and more radical factions, that does not mean we should say "Centre-left to far-left" or "Centre-right to far-right." Democratic socialist parties are generally considered centre-left to left-wing, not far-left; the latter is generally reserved to communist parties or even to the parties to the left the communist parties (just to show how there's no clear definition like there is for the far right). Davide King (talk) 23:42, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung 

message: If wiki dares to smear conservative-patriotic forces such as PVV and Forum vor Democracy as either "far-right" or "nationalist" then this party with its commie roots is a far-left extremist party.
Otherwise you engage in promoting double standards by smearing the right and promoting the left with corrupt, one-sided articles. 62.226.72.189 (talk) 01:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @62.226.72.189 Well it clearly describes the communist roots in the introduction of the article. Cant really be missed. But nowadays, it is clearly no longer communist. And if communism is the threshhold for far-left, then this party is also no longer far-left. Dajasj (talk) 08:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Communist party 

message: There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics/Political parties regarding the inclusion of the party flag in the infobox of this article. The thread is Party flags in infoboxes. Thank you. — Ætoms [talk] 23:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notification of discussion involving this article 

message: I've been seeing online (only twitter, nothing verified) that it appears the party is slightly following the Danish Social Democratic Party route of becoming more critical of immigration, has anyone seen any reliable sources in Dutch corroborating this so it could be added to the page? Guyb123321 (talk) 14:39, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immigration