Jump to content

Talk:Green Party of the United States

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mcampo-06 (article contribs).

Inclusion of Shadow Senator elections

[edit]

Per this revert, Namiba is asking for discussion on inclusion of two "Shadow Senator" races alongside legitimate Senate races. Shadow Senators are not a real office, or a real Senate election; they are, by definition, quasi-offices created by DC to advocate for statehood. Including these will likely confuse readers into thinking that these offices are the same thing as actual Senators (they are not), or into thinking that DC actually has Senators (which they do not). I see no reason to include them. Toa Nidhiki05 19:00, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are articles about these elections (2024 United States Shadow Senator election in the District of Columbia), articles about the winners of the elections (ex: Michael Donald Brown), and an article about the role itself (Shadow congressperson). The term "shadow" and the article on the role indicates to readers exactly what they are. I see no reason not to include them here. For the purposes of the Green Party, they indicate the position of the party in DC, which is helpful to the reader.--User:Namiba 19:07, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Except it's not a federal election or the same office. Their job is to lobby Congress. They aren't actually senators, and it's incredibly misleading to list them as such. Toa Nidhiki05 19:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is an issue to take up elsewhere, not on this article.--User:Namiba 19:34, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is absolutely an issue to take up on this article. Toa Nidhiki05 19:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reliability of the source describing of the party as 'left-wing

[edit]

@User:Toa Nidhiki05

Okay so, this source [1] says The Green Party, which presents itself as a left-wing alternative to both the Democrats and Republicans. It says that it presents itself as a left-wing alternative, it doesn't itself describe it as a left-wing party; this is a key distinction, as what the party says about itself is not a reliable source, especially with this, as there is accusations that the party is a Russian backed psyop to split votes from the democrats and benefit the right. In key of the presence of accusations like these, a source of the party's political position should be held to a high scrutiny of reliability.

Additionally, the phrasing is somewhat ambiguous between whether the source is saying that it presents itself as merely further to the left of the democrats and republicans, or if it's saying it presents itself as left-wing proper (as opposed to centre-left or far-left). I lean towards the former, as its comparative with regards to the democrats and republicans. Hypothetically, if a centre-left party was formed in a country with a far-right and a right-wing party, and it presented itself as such, I would describe it as presenting itself as 'a left-wing alternative to party A and party B', and believe that to be an accurate comparative description.

It is for these two reasons that I do not believe the statement in that source meets the high standard of reliability present with Wikipedia. Primarily for the first reason, with the second as an additional reason.

Would you agree, or do you have a different perspective I haven't considered? (or another source I guess) A Socialist Trans Girl 03:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reason to suspect the party is a Russian psyop. That's pretty silly. The source clearly identifies the party as left-wing, which is more or less what matters. Regardless, I've found a slew of additional sources for far-left, actually:

Toa Nidhiki05 05:25, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there is reason. And no, that's wrong, it says that the party presents itself as left-wing, not that it is.
That first one is talking about the North Carolina Green Party, not the national party.
The third one is talking about Jill Stein, not the green party as a whole.
Couldn't find much info about the second source book source.
Not quite sure the implications of the 4th.
Quite frankly, I don't think that news sources with passing refrences about it being far-left is the way to go (for this, and for other parties as well). I think we should do academic sources instead. A Socialist Trans Girl 10:56, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Library of Congress also calls the GPUS a left-wing party. In fact, I could not find a reliable source which describes the GPUS's political orientation as anything other than left-wing. Between self-identification and the widespread usage in the media, there is no reason to not describe the GPUS as left-wing, especially in the US political context.--User:Namiba 13:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]