Talk:Social Democrats (Ireland)

Ireland Low‑importance

	Ireland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject IrelandTemplate:WikiProject IrelandIreland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideology[edit]

This party's principle ideology is social democracy, it's referenced, and it's been included in the infobox since the page was created. That their name is the Social Democrats is irrelevant. Stop removing referenced content without consensus, "MasterChiefGuardian" (or whoever you previously edited as...). Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:20, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What does that have to do with redundancy?MasterChiefGuardian (talk) 14:55, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's not redundant. Spleodrach (talk) 20:12, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly you have a lot to say then. Are you really so poor at argumentation that your response to something is to simply flat out deny that something?MasterChiefGuardian (talk) 22:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When you removed "Social democracy" from the ideology, your comment was "Redundant", so I am obviously as poor at argumentation as you are. Anyway, I picked 5 Social Democratic parties at random from the list at Social Democratic Party. Social Democratic Party (UK, 1990–present), Social Democratic Party of Germany, Social Democratic Party of Finland, Social Democrats (Denmark) and Social Democratic Party of Austria, I find that all of them have Social democracy as their Ideology. So run along now dear, and close the door on your way out. Spleodrach (talk) 18:04, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New chairperson elected[edit]

The new chairperson of the Social Democrats is Síle Ní Dhubhgaill [1]. Culloty82 (talk) 15:26, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SocDem/Labour Relantionship[edit]

@Bastun: I added the "Relationship with Labour" section because, within the Irish political circles and the media, the possibility of a merger is frequently discussed (partially because it is fueled by Kelly). However, as demonstrated in the paragraph, the interest is decidedly one-sided. Nonetheless, it has remained a topic related to the SocDems for over 4 years, one they're frequently had to address. I don't think it's correct to simply blank the entire subsection; other political party articles also include sections discussing possible mergers. The Social Democratic and Labour Party article, for example, contains a subsection discussing that a merger with Fianna Fail has been a reoccurring topic.
You said in your removal message that the section might be more relevant to the Labour article. I believe it's relevant to both parties and had considered adding it to the Labour party article as well, however that article is quite long and I wasn't sure how or where such a subsection would fit in.
I think something demonstrating "a merger has been floated but the SocDems have shown no interest" is worth mentioning. CeltBrowne (talk) 13:27, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FF and the SDLP actually have a formal arrangement,though. In this case, though, it's literally just one TD - Kelly - saying "we should merge" and various SD people saying "eh, no." It certainly doesn't merit a full section. Maybe one sentence in the history section along the lines of "Since 2017, multiple calls for a merger by Alan Kelly of the Labour Party have been firmly rejected.", with a couple of references? Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well he's not just one TD anymore, he's the leader of that party, so it carries additional weight. I'd prefer to offer the reader more context about why the merger is not happening but if it has to be stripped down to one line, how about: Since 2017, Alan Kelly TD of the Labour party has made repeated calls for the Social Democrats to merge with the Labour party, but has been firmly rebuffed each time by the Social Democrats' party leadership. CeltBrowne (talk) 16:40, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That works for me :-) Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 20:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Current TD Pictures[edit]

Odd addition, does the Labour Party have its 7 TD pictured? IrishTV (talk) 19:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, but People before Profit has it's representatives pictured, as do other small political partys on Wikipedia such as Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand#Current members of parliament and Australian Greens#Current federal parliamentarians. Larger parties and/or parties with long tenures tend to have an image of their current leader include (when possible) in their most recent history section. CeltBrowne (talk) 21:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]