Jump to content

Talk:Revival (Bulgarian political party): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Russia: Reply
Russia: Reply
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply
Line 27: Line 27:
::yeah I think it should be removed from BV. Recent statements from BV (including in debates) show a clear emphasis on preseving existing alliance systems, seeing Russia as the agressor state and supporting Ukraine with military aid. [[User:Bulpoliticsedit|Bulpoliticsedit]] ([[User talk:Bulpoliticsedit|talk]]) 20:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
::yeah I think it should be removed from BV. Recent statements from BV (including in debates) show a clear emphasis on preseving existing alliance systems, seeing Russia as the agressor state and supporting Ukraine with military aid. [[User:Bulpoliticsedit|Bulpoliticsedit]] ([[User talk:Bulpoliticsedit|talk]]) 20:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
:{{ping|SaltyViking}} Just to let you know that Wikipedia uses [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] (both Reuters and Deutsche Welle are listed as reliable sources on [[WP:RSP]]) and that you've been already reverted several times by multiple editors, so you should stop edit-warring. Just because Revival might claim that they are not pro-Russian, that would actually not justify its removal from the infobox, as Revival is the primary source in this case. This is a common [[WP:IWAR]] example: whitewashing one party's image just because they do like to be described as pro-Russian. [[User:Vacant0|Vacant0]] ([[User talk:Vacant0|talk]]) 20:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
:{{ping|SaltyViking}} Just to let you know that Wikipedia uses [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] (both Reuters and Deutsche Welle are listed as reliable sources on [[WP:RSP]]) and that you've been already reverted several times by multiple editors, so you should stop edit-warring. Just because Revival might claim that they are not pro-Russian, that would actually not justify its removal from the infobox, as Revival is the primary source in this case. This is a common [[WP:IWAR]] example: whitewashing one party's image just because they do like to be described as pro-Russian. [[User:Vacant0|Vacant0]] ([[User talk:Vacant0|talk]]) 20:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
::You can write it as a remark but not as a ideology. Ideology is defined by what the party considers itself and who it supports, neither there is proof of Russian funding or pro-Russian statements. I do not like Kostadinov, but he has claimed multiple times that he is not Pro-Russian, in your logic you can also say that Revival is Turkophobic, because many have mentioned it. You as a Serb, should now that being neutral does not mean being pro-Russian, and he claims that. In the Bulgarian Wikipedia no one has written that his party is Russophilian. To sum up, neither BV nor Revival is openly pro-Russian. Please, I do not want non-neutral pro or anti Russian wikipedia. [[User:SaltyViking|SaltyViking]] ([[User talk:SaltyViking|talk]]) 22:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:07, 19 April 2023

WikiProject iconBulgaria Stub‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria 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.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:21, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"ultranationalist" sounds more like a straw man argument rather than an objective introduction

How do even distinguish between nationalism and ultranationalism? Ultranationalism is left-wing smear. 93.206.56.188 (talk) 23:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ultranationalism is an academic term that is characterized as an extreme form of nationalism that anthropomorphizes a country that experiences eras of decay and growth based on arbitrary labels of arbitrary degeneracy which Revival refers to inferior cultures. The Revival party has many connections to anti Gypsy Skinhead gangs from the early 2010s as well as its leader otherizing the Jewish community, saying they're guests. As well as possessing irredentist policies toward North Macedonia. Rebel14 (talk) 15:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not the definition that is slapped here on the pages of Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultranationalism
"...Ultranationalism or extreme nationalism is an extreme form of nationalism in which a country asserts or maintains detrimental hegemony, supremacy, or other forms of control OVER other nations (usually through VIOLENT coercion) to pursue its specific interests. Ultranationalist entities have been associated with the engagement of political VIOLENCE even during peacetime. The belief system has also been cited as the inspiration behind acts of organized MASS MURDER in the context of international conflict, e.g. the Cambodian genocide..."
Revival was the only party in Bulgaria that insisted that Russia and Ukraine should immediately stop the war and begin peace talks and that Bulgaria should not take a side in the conflict, so how does that make them ultra-nationalistic and far-right? It doesn't Boris (talk) 04:58, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Russia

@SaltyViking: there are two types of nationalist parties in Bulgaria "Patriots" (more moderate & pro-western) and nationalist (pro-russian & extreme). Vaz is clearly the latter for example here an image of protests by Vaz with russian flags


"They need to claim it, until they reject it, you cannot write that they are a Russophilian party." is an extreme position to define russophilia even for Bulgaria. Braganza (talk) 20:04, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

and if you think Russophilia should be removed on Vaz, what about BV?! they even voted for sending weapons to ukraine Braganza (talk) 20:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
yeah I think it should be removed from BV. Recent statements from BV (including in debates) show a clear emphasis on preseving existing alliance systems, seeing Russia as the agressor state and supporting Ukraine with military aid. Bulpoliticsedit (talk) 20:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SaltyViking: Just to let you know that Wikipedia uses reliable sources (both Reuters and Deutsche Welle are listed as reliable sources on WP:RSP) and that you've been already reverted several times by multiple editors, so you should stop edit-warring. Just because Revival might claim that they are not pro-Russian, that would actually not justify its removal from the infobox, as Revival is the primary source in this case. This is a common WP:IWAR example: whitewashing one party's image just because they do like to be described as pro-Russian. Vacant0 (talk) 20:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can write it as a remark but not as a ideology. Ideology is defined by what the party considers itself and who it supports, neither there is proof of Russian funding or pro-Russian statements. I do not like Kostadinov, but he has claimed multiple times that he is not Pro-Russian, in your logic you can also say that Revival is Turkophobic, because many have mentioned it. You as a Serb, should now that being neutral does not mean being pro-Russian, and he claims that. In the Bulgarian Wikipedia no one has written that his party is Russophilian. To sum up, neither BV nor Revival is openly pro-Russian. Please, I do not want non-neutral pro or anti Russian wikipedia. SaltyViking (talk) 22:07, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]