Talk:Red–Green Alliance (Denmark)

message: The link to the party's homepage in English is broken, and should be as follows:
http://enhedslisten.dk/content/red-green-alliance
Can anyone secure in Wiki-edits please do this?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.249.0.170 (talk) 11:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor changes

message: Please don't revert my changes and call them vandalism. They're all referenced and are not POV. Malangyar (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Asmaa Abdol-Hamid must be proud of the tenacity of all her agitprop supporters who are so keen to suppress the facts. Like all the rest, Malangyar, you hate the glaringly obvious truths:
-  she is controversial because of her headgear, her rejection of handshakes and her endorsement from imams. 
- people everywhere are questioning her commitment to democracy, not just in the Danish People's Party. 
- the party lost votes because of her.  
These issues are central to the 2007 election.
Your edits are clearly an attempt to obfuscate the whole issue, like the other agitprop people, Soman and Åberg. I will not stand for it. Ovest (talk) 22:03, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Facts added

message: "The party cooperates with a number of international organizations, including The European Anticapitalist Left (EACL), The European Alliance of EU-critical Movements (TEAM), and The New European Left Forum (NELF)..." - I'm not at all sure that NELF exists any more.--86.142.110.97 17:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It certainly existed at the time when you asked your question ( http://www.vasemmistoliitto.fi/politiikka/kannanotot/kannanotot_2007/en_GB/1194268393859/ ). 86.155.65.123 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 06:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Does NELF still exist?

message: Since this page is protected due to a content dispute, please can someone answer these questions for me:
* What caused the dispute/edit war??
* Who are the main participants in the dispute/edit war??
* How can we resolve this on the talk page??
Thanks, --Solumeiras talk 18:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In my opinion (as one of three main participants in the edit war), the conflict lies in two issues: 1) in how to explain causality of issues concerning Asmaa Abdol-Hamid's candidature and 2) whether to use weasel wordings against Abdol-Hamid. I think that the resolution lies in patience. The elections are held in Denmark on Tuesday, and in the week to come there will be plenty of analysis of the electoral outcome in Danish media. That will give a basis for decent and properly sourced wording on the issue.--Soman 19:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I haven't read this thread and I don't plan to do so. However, Asmaa's candidature is deeply controversial in Denmark and it has been a standing joke / comment among political commentators for weeks that she might cost the Red-Green Alliance its representation in parliament. Several newspapers blame her squarely for the Red-Greens' sharp drop in opinion polls.  (Danmarks Radio citing Fyens Stiftstidende and Nordjyske Stiftstidende: Asmaa brings the Red-Green Alliance to its knees),  (Jyllands-Posten: Religious war in the Red-Green Alliance),  (Politiken: Asmaa scares the Marxists). On the other hand, elections specialist Risbjerg Thomsen now seems to have swung to the opinion that she may win representation anyway.  (Danmarks Radio)  (Jyllands-Posten). In any case, this controversy needs to be described one way or the other. Valentinian T / C 14:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection 

message: The article should contain the following phrase:
In the 2007 elections, the party lost two seats in parliament and now has a total of four. The party got 2.2 % of votes, putting it just above the cut-off limit of 2.0 % required to be in parliament.
Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • &site=  count) 07:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My suggestion is a separate chapter on 2007 elections, which should mention campaign (issue taken up by the party) and results, like above. Abdol-Hamid should be mentioned, but the article should avoid straying into speculations. The passage should also be in balance to the rest of the party history. --Soman 13:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The election is part of the controversy, yes, but the number of seats in parliament, as well as the names in those seats once available, are matters of indisputable fact and the article should reflect this, IMO, regardless of disputes about Asmaa in the article. Lilac Soul (talk • contribs • &site=  count) 14:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: 'Mr. Aaen has publicly blamed Asmaa' = 'Asmaa stadig en del af partiet/- Hun vil blive ved med at være en fremtræden politiker i Enhedslisten, hvor hun vil kæmpe for integration og mangfoldighed, siger Frank Aaen.' ??? Nice try. What is said is that Aaen aknowledges that Asmaa's candidature has had 'a negative impact'. That doesn't really provide any info on to what extent this contributed, just that it contributed in some way. As an analysis, this article gives no basis at all. --Soman 20:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You consciously twist Aaen's comments. The whole point of his presentation is that he reaffirm's his support to Abdol-Hamid. He does in the end say that her candidature had a 'negative impact', but 1) this appears to be in response to question posed by journalist (as opposed to something he would have emphasized) and 2) as opposed to the rest of the article, we are not provided with Aaen's own wording (suggesting that the wording formulated by the journalist would have been more direct than the one used by Aaen). In short, to say that he 'blames' her is incorrect. Regarding the impact, I don't dispute the claim that Abdol-Hamid's candidature is probably one of several factors that contributed to the loss of votes for Enhedslisten, but the wordings you've used have speculative, biased and outright offensive to Muslims. Let's stick to facts and where we can't say something for sure, let people form their own opinion. --Soman 11:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit protected

message: It sounds like Soman is referring to his old claim that any assertion of a link between Asmaa and the party's losses is "speculation". He is more keen to peddle positive agitprop stories about the party than Frank Aaen, arguably the most prominent party member, a well-trained former communist party official. No small feat. Mr. Aaen has publicly blamed Asmaa.  Ovest 16:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Mr. Aaen has publicly blamed Asmaa' = 'Asmaa stadig en del af partiet/- Hun vil blive ved med at være en fremtræden politiker i Enhedslisten, hvor hun vil kæmpe for integration og mangfoldighed, siger Frank Aaen.' ??? Nice try. What is said is that Aaen aknowledges that Asmaa's candidature has had 'a negative impact'. That doesn't really provide any info on to what extent this contributed, just that it contributed in some way. As an analysis, this article gives no basis at all. --Soman 20:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: You consciously twist Aaen's comments. The whole point of his presentation is that he reaffirm's his support to Abdol-Hamid. He does in the end say that her candidature had a 'negative impact', but 1) this appears to be in response to question posed by journalist (as opposed to something he would have emphasized) and 2) as opposed to the rest of the article, we are not provided with Aaen's own wording (suggesting that the wording formulated by the journalist would have been more direct than the one used by Aaen). In short, to say that he 'blames' her is incorrect. Regarding the impact, I don't dispute the claim that Abdol-Hamid's candidature is probably one of several factors that contributed to the loss of votes for Enhedslisten, but the wordings you've used have speculative, biased and outright offensive to Muslims. Let's stick to facts and where we can't say something for sure, let people form their own opinion. --Soman 11:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spin-off discussion

message: Is this party an environmental party? There is no mention of it in the article. F 09:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The official full name of the party in Danish, with direct translation into English, is 'Unity List - the red-greens'. Note that 'Red-Green' is not identical to 'Green' nor to 'Red'+'Green'. The English name 'Red-Green Alliance' has probably been chosen to profile it towards other left movements in Europe. There have been important influences from enviromental movement to the party, and it pursues active environmental policies, but it is not a 'Green Party' in the sense that the German or Swedish Green Parties are. Notably, the Danish SF has worked more towards profiling itself as the 'Green Party' in Danish politics. --Soman 11:49, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is it "green"? 

message: I have inserted the text on Asmaa Abdol-Hamid and the November 13 election which I proposed earlier (see above). This text was criticized but no alternatives were proposed and I therefore assume it is acceptable to my opponents after all. Ovest (talk) 18:05, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  End of dispute 

message: The user Malangyar has deleted the passage which emerged as a result of the dispute. Simple deletion of this sort is against wikipedia guidelines. If Malangyar believes changes should be made, please use this discussion page and please make only verifiable claims. If no the page will need to be blocked again.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ovest (talk • contribs) 20:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reopening of dispute

message: Enhedslisten is pretty notorious for its factions, so i found an article by the danish newspaper "Information" which goes into depth with each one, as well as the (still active even though its from 2006) political programme of the largest of the factions (which is SAP) i have cited both in the new "factions" subsection of the wikibox. I have also made some minor additions to the introduction which now mentions its history as well as its current political work, i have made appropiate citations. Kindly do not delete my additions:-) 89.23.235.49 (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Factions break the point of MOS:INFOBOX and the sources that you've added do not back up the added claims. I've restored it to the last stable version. Vacant0 (talk) 12:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factions 

message: Here in Denmark, our main brodcasters are DR and TV2. They use some specific political colors assigned to the different parties we have at the moment. Both of them uses the color orange to represent the party, as seen here (Ø represent the party)
 . Apart from that on the official site of the parliament, orange is also the color used to represent Red Green Alliance (EL represents the party) 
Here is two pictures to demonstrate why I believe that orange would be an improved color for the party. 
 (current)
 (my proposal)
Currently the colors of Liberal Alliance and Danish People's Party match their popular color in the media instead of their logo color, and I really think that having 3 parties with a type of red is a bad idea, so I think an alteration to Orange is needed here.
Diff:
 Thomediter (talk) 18:24, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color change to Orange