Talk:European Conservatives and Reformists Party/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Template AECR

A Template need to be created for the AECR. One already exists for the corresponding parliamentary group ECR, but both organisations need to be distinguished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julien-223 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

You mean this: {{Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists}}, which is used at the bottom of the page? Bastin 12:12, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Unilateral rewrite

The entire article has been rewritten by IP addresses without any attempt to support the edits with references or reference to the style guide, nor with any explanation through the edit summaries. Given the number of IP addresses being used, it is impossible to keep up with who is who or maintain any discussion. Hence, I'm requesting that editors discuss their edits here AND leave an edit summary when rewriting the article, per good Wikipedia etiquette.

I'm also requesting semi-protection to prevent IPs from editing. Bastin 20:59, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I see several of those IP edits are missing edit summaries. Aside from that, their editing made the article better over what it was before, which included dubious references and bad style (before: [1], after: [2]). The article that those IPs have made mainly presented one source, the AECR Official Website. Also, all your revert summaries were false, as those reasons that you have listed were already fixed a long time before you started reverting them.

I smell vandalism, and it's coming from you. 101.108.28.97 (talk) 21:18, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

My revert summaries were actually correct and explained how the article was being improved by the edits. Hence why the IP edits were tagged for removing references - references should not be removed without good reason (and, yes, a ConHome piece saying the AECR is the successor to the MER is better than no reference for that statement). Replacing sources with first-party sources is not acceptable; except for the prosaic (eg how the Board of Directors is elected, who the member parties are), references must be reliable third-party sources. For most purposes, the AECR is not such a source, so citing only the AECR website is unacceptable.

I have no idea why you think the latter is better than the former. For example, per WP:MOS, the notability of a subject should be included in the first paragraph. For political parties, that means including how many seats the party has in a relevant organ. Thus, the first paragraph of the introduction should mention how many MEPs and members of the Council it has - your edit removed that, against the MOS. I suggest that you justify your edits individually, given your penchant for not using edit summaries.

Please don't hide behind an IP address and accuse experienced Wikipedians of vandalism. Further, please explain what your relationship to the other IP addresses is. It's painfully obvious that it's orchestrated to force a WP:3RR, hence my request for semi-protection. Bastin 21:27, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that Wikipedia is your personal blog site. I will stop disturbing your work now while trying to forget about hours of work that I've put into this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.250.208.152 (talk) 22:31, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia is policy-driven; disputes are resolved by citing policy, not by whatever that response was supposed to be. If one can't and doesn't do that, one's ownership of the article becomes an obstacle to Wikipedia, not an advantage, as it ought to be. Please also note that I wrote the article (in a manner in-keeping with Wikipedia policy) before you unilaterally changed it without explanation. All I am asking is that you explain your edits - because they don't seem to abide by Wikipedia policy, guidelines, and best practice.

As noted in my edit summary (check out how that works), I am now editing each section in turn (explaining what and why in the edit summary), and I invite you to weigh in on your opinion as to how your version was better. Please engage constructively in that process. Bastin 22:57, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok, you've said you will edit the article and ask for input each day now. Could you speed it up a little and do this like one edit per minute or faster? I only have about an hour of time for this. After that, I won't be able to get on a computer for a week, so make it count. 80.237.83.225 (talk) 23:16, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

I assume from that that you had no objection to the edits to the infobox. I have now edited the introduction. Any complaints? Bastin 23:40, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 14 October 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved as uncontroversial request — JFG ^talk 16:21, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists → Alliance of Conservatives and Reformists in Europe – The Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists (AECR) has officially changed its name to the Alliance of Conservatives and Reformists in Europe (ACRE). Please cf. this with AECR's old website www.aecr.eu, with its new website www.acreurope.eu, and with the following press release: http://www.acreurope.eu/item/aecr_to_change_its_name_to_acre. ACREurope (talk) 08:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Alliance of Conservatives and Reformists in Europe. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Finland’s Blue Reform

https://www.sininentulevaisuus.fi/blue-reform-member-acre/ Kaihsu (talk) 10:35, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

New party name

The party recently changed name to the European Conservatives and Reformists, consistent with the name of its political group in the European Parliament. See its official twitter account and official Facebook account. --Glentamara (talk) 20:14, 12 July 2019 (UTC)