Talk:Labour Party (Poland)

	Poland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Poland 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.PolandWikipedia:WikiProject PolandTemplate:WikiProject PolandPoland articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Politics: Political parties 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.
	This article is supported by Political parties task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Wrong name[edit]

"Labour party" is an inaccurate translation of "Stronnictwo Pracy", particularly since there was a different party called "Partia Pracy", i.e. "Labour Party" - [1]. In absence of an obvious translation of "Stronnictwo Pracy", I am going to move this to simply "Stronnictwo Pracy" though I welcome suggestions for an adequate translation.Volunteer Marek (talk) 21:32, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. That was the title I created this under, and it was moved to a new title without any discussion. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 23:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move as requested, both Subnumine and In ictu oculi suggestions below for two separate articles have merit and should be discussed further. A new RM requesting explicit titles along these lines may generate some consensus. Mike Cline (talk) 16:12, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Labour Party (Poland) → Stronnictwo Pracy – "Labour Party" is an inaccurate translation of Polish "Stronnictwo Pracy". Normally this wouldn't be a big problem (since it's sort of close) but here the thing is that there was another Polish party during this period called "Partia Pracy" - which does translate to "Labour Party". This page should be moved back to "Stronnictwo Pracy", which was its original title before an undiscussed move, and the article should be expanded. The newly created redirect under "Labour Party (Poland)" can then be turned into a proper article on the "Partia Pracy".relisted--Mike Cline (talk) 15:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)VolunteerMarek 17:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nom.VolunteerMarek 17:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- but I would suggest that both be place on a dabpage for "labour party", with a correct translation for the subject of this article. Peterkingiron (talk) 23:44, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good point.VolunteerMarek 00:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support, and agree with Peter about the dab page (or perhaps hatnotes would suffice) - I can't think of any helpful way of translating the name of this party which wouldn't mislead, so probably best to just refer to it by its original name.--Kotniski (talk) 12:46, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Restoring the old title, reverting undiscussed move, restoring correct, clearly disambigous title. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 13:31, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Searching for this, as with a this result, shows that normal usage in English is to call this the Labor Party (or Labour Party) with Stronnictwo Pracy in parentheses. Any inaccuracy in the normal translation should be addressed in the text of this stub. The chief purpose of titles in this English Wikipedia is to tell the anglophone reader whether he's at the right article. This move fails to do that. Subnumine (talk) 22:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So what would you put "Partia Pracy" under?VolunteerMarek 22:57, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that could be done would be to disambiguate them more explicitly; Labor Party (Partia Pracy) and Labor Party (Stronnictwo Pracy) would be one way to do that; (Poland) is implied by the use of Polish.
But if I see correctly that the Partia only existed as such for a couple years, just writing any new article under Labor Party (Partia Pracy) would be equally reasonable.
Or write both articles under this title (The Labor Party in Polish history refers to either of two small parties in antebellum Poland; in Polish, their names are...Partia is the Polish equivalent for English Party; Stronnictwo means...) Unless they're going to be more than stubs, this would be a reasonable use of space. The result would even have two sections. Subnumine (talk) 23:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These are reasonable suggestions, let me think about it. The last one won't really work though because "Stronnictwo Pracy" and "Partia Pracy" where somewhat opposed ideologically so it would make no sense to put them together into a single article.

I'll wait and see what other people say.VolunteerMarek 00:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This ideological point is another weakness of "Labor Party" as a translation of Stronnictwo Pracy - as far as I can tell, its politics were quite the opposite of what would be expected from a Labor Party as we know it.--Kotniski (talk) 07:11, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was sort of envisioned as a kind of "Christian Democratic Labor Party".VolunteerMarek 23:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose English sources use Labor Party of both, so Labor Party (Partia Pracy) and Labor Party (Stronnictwo Pracy). The main problem here seems to sourcing, and that the articles have so little information. One source says Partia Pracy was set up by Front Morges, another (Plach) says Partia Pracy "evolved from left-wing peasant party PSL-Liberation", which or both is correct? In ictu oculi (talk) 23:06, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At least one of us is confused. I *think* Front Morges was related to "Stronnictwo Pracy", active 1937+, portrayed itself as centrist/Christian Democratic/Populist, but in opposition to the Sanacja. "Partia Pracy" was active in the 1920's and was the split of the left-wing peasant PSL-Liberation. It was somewhat leftish/liberal but... supported the Sanacja government and was merged into OZON/Sanacja which was the "government party". SP's most significant politicians were Wojciech Korfanty, Karol Popiel. PP's most significant politicians were Kazimierz Bartel (initially officially, later indirectly), Wacław Grzybowski, and Stanisław Thugutt.

Honestly, I care less about the actual names and more with cleaning up this whole confusion.VolunteerMarek 23:33, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This "Party of Work" which you added to the article - is that used in any sources? If so, then it might be a viable name. But we should be careful about not inventing new names.VolunteerMarek 23:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Volunteer Marek, if you click on the [1] after the term you will find the source:

Eva Plach The clash of moral nations: cultural politics in Piłsudski's Poland, 1926-1935 (9780821416952): - Footnote Page 205/206 2006 "Party of Work (Partia Pracy) (which had evolved from left-wing peasant party PSL-Liberation) to form the Union of Labor in Town and Village (Zjednoczenie Pracy Wsi i Miast) in June 1928. The Union of Labor in turn formed a core block within the BBWR .."

In fact it is the only source in this stub-article. I note that Polish Wikipedia pl:Stronnictwo Pracy has no sources either. Cheers In ictu oculi (talk) 00:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, thing is that other English sources use "Party of Work" for SP [2], [3]. Ugh. I really don't care which one's which, just as long as they're somehow separated. I can add sources/expand once I know which article I'm expanding and sourcing.VolunteerMarek 01:48, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. A rudimentary search of English sources shows that "Labor Party" is how it is commonly translated. It is really unfortunate there doesn't seem to be a good English equivalent of "Stronnictwo". I can't find a proper English source that handles both Stronnictwo and Partia simultaneously. The only one I've found seems to call the former "Party of Labor", and the other as "Labor Party". Not very helpful. Walrasiad (talk) 05:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose—English-speakers are accessing this. $Tony (talk)$ 07:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's your point? Did you actually read the rationale? Anyway, neither of the last two opposes is actually *helpful* since it offers no suggestion to fix the present confusion. I guess it's fine if things are confused and inaccurate as long as they are confused and inaccurate "in English".VolunteerMarek 08:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Ok, because these RM's take up way too much time and sometimes generate more heat than light, what I'm going to do is to simply follow In ictu oculi/Subnumine's suggestion above and create two articles Labor Party (Partia Pracy) and Labor Party (Stronnictwo Pracy). As far as I can tell there was no opposition above to that suggestion, except perhaps from myself (though that was more of a "thinking outloud" kind of thing). Then I will make this into disambiguation page for the two Polish labor parties. I'm gonna leave this comment here for a little bit before I do it, just to make sure that there's no objections.VolunteerMarek 19:53, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine, just create redirects from labour. Or vice versa. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 20:39, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move[edit]

@Abcmaxx: I've reverted your move of the article. I was particularly flummoxed by your edit summary "stronnictwo = faction; inaccurate translation not backed by sources" as all three sources in the article translate stronnictwo as party: "the Labour Party (Chrześcijańsko-Demokratyczne Stronnictwo Pracy)","the Labour Party (Stronnictwo Pracy: SP)""Christian-Democratic Labor Party (Chrześcijańsko-Demokratyczne Stronnictwo Pracy)". Could you explain what sources you are referring to? Number 5 7 15:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Number 57 Any dictionary will tell you that "Stronnictwo" = "Faction" Source. The sources talk about ChSDP, which is a longer and more distinct name. Even so, it is a lazy translation; UK, Canadian and Austrialian Labour Parties are called "Partia Pracy"; this is a minor political group and translations are often wrong, e.g. a source had "Agreement Party" erroneously translated as "Alliance", which made no sense. Law and Justice had numerous bizarre translations when they were a minor party, now that they are an established large party a consensus has been reached. The only Labour Party in Poland is Partia Pracy, and this title should be reserved for them, not for the Labour Faction.Abcmaxx (talk) 15:55, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Abcmaxx: Dictionary translations don't matter though. What matters is how the party is referred to in English sources. There are numerous examples of parties known in English by a name that is not an exact translation. For example, the Danish Social Liberal Party is not an exact (or even rough) translation of Radikale Venstre, nor is Social Democratic Party (Faroe Islands) a direct translation of Javnaðarflokkurin. However, these are how the parties are known in the English-speaking world. Number 5 7 16:08, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Number 57: That still doesn't answer why Partia Pracy is Labour Party but Stronnictwo Pracy, a completely different name, is also Labour Party. I am all for sticking to sources but no when a) they're clearly wrong b) the sources aren't that decisive and c) when there is a conflict with other names. The party is very minor so there is no English-speaking consensus; a brief mention in a 2-3 sources isn't exactly decisive. Abcmaxx (talk) 19:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An explanation is not needed – it is what it is. By all means request a move, but you'll need to prove that Stronnictwo Pracy is the common name in English-language sources. Number 5 7 19:24, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 July 2020[edit]

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It was proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

result:
No consensus. See no agreement below to rename these articles. As is usual with a no-consensus outcome, arguments can be strengthened and a new attempt to garner consensus for these renames can be made in a few months. Kudos to editors for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover) P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 07:26, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Links: current log • target log

This is template {{subst:Requested move/end}}

– Please read the above threads Abcmaxx (talk) 19:31, 22 July 2020 (UTC) —Relisted. P.I. Ellsworth ed. ^put'r there 09:24, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose No evidence has been provided that the party is known as "Labour Faction" in English. All the sources in the article use the word "Party". Number 5 7 20:24, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.