User talk:Julius Schwarz

Disambiguation link notification for March 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited European political party, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages EPP, ALDE and Jordi Solé. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good bot. Changed the links accordingly.

Julius Schwarz (talk) 07:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Funding of European political parties has been accepted

Funding of European political parties, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as B-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a fantastic rating for a new article, and places it among the top 3% of accepted submissions — major kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

꧁Zanahary꧂ 07:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Zanahary for approving this and for the encouraging message, that's appreciated. I like the topic and I am glad if we can have good content on it. I will look at the ratings page to see what more can be done. Julius Schwarz (talk) 07:55, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RM's after seven days

In response to your question What happens after the seven-day period has elapsed, requested moves are listed at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Current discussions. Once the seven-day period has elapsed they drop into the "elapsed listings" section, and a closer will come along to either close the discussion or relist. BilledMammal (talk) 21:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply and thank you for handling both move requests. I know there was not a whole lot of discussion (at unfortunately there isn't on European political parties) but I am glad to process concluded this way. Julius Schwarz (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Julius Schwarz! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! BilledMammal (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very appreciated, thank you! I will definitely check out these resources. It's already been very instructive over the past few weeks!! Julius Schwarz (talk) 17:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:MEPcountEuropeanParty

Template:MEPcountEuropeanParty has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 08:43, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. That was kept in case there were issues with the Wikidata pull, but I guess it can be deleted if necessary. Julius Schwarz (talk) 08:55, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linking party colours to Wikidata

Can you explain why you’ve been going around replacing the use of Template:Party color with links to Wikidata? Was this discussed anywhere? It is standard practice in the English Wikipedia to use this template, it takes the colours from Module:Political party, and discussions related to them take place in Module talk:Political party. If you plan to change this, I think it needs to be discussed there first. Brainiac242 (talk) 12:11, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Brainiac242, since this seemed like an innocuous change, it did not feel like it required a dedicated discussion, but I am happy to have it.

The reasoning was that these colours are used many times across pages (in the infobox, in the tables showing presence in EU institutions, often also for composition bars of member parties, etc.). As a result, if a party was to change, all instances would have to updated. This removes this need, as all references point to the Wikidata label (which is the same colour as the one in the party colour template).

Additionally, this makes it easier to copy-paste elements as the wikidata call often does not need to contain the wikidata label, but instance takes it directly from the Wikipedia-Wikidata link. This means that, when a new party is created, a simple copy-paste from one page to another is sufficient. The same applies, for instance, with composition bars for the European Parliament, Commission, Council, etc.

Do you see a downside to this? Julius Schwarz (talk) 12:19, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The way it now works, when the colour of a party changes, changing it in Module:Political party also changes it across all those instances. If the page is moved, it’s enough to create a new entry in the module with a redirect, making the Template:Party color work with both the previous and the new title. All those instances never have to be updated individually. In my opinion, this change doesn’t bring any improvement, but it does unnecessarily create a system for these parties that is completely different that for all other parties, in addition to making it more difficult to change and discuss those colours for the many Wikipedia editors that aren’t familiar with the functioning of Wikidata.

Using this system to update the number of MEPs, does avoid having to update them individually throughout Wikipedia, but it still creates this additional difficulty. And even if it didn’t, in many of the cases you have used it, I actually think they shouldn’t be updated automatically. When you update in Wikidata the number of MEPs of a European political group, for example, it is now automatically changed in the infobox of its article, but not in the MEPs table below. So, unless the article is updated manually anyway, the two composition bars would show different numbers, making readers unsure about which one is correct. If your system were used in both of them, unless the article is updated manually anyway, the total number of MEPs of every party in the table wouldn’t be the number of MEPs shown in the composition bar below. Brainiac242 (talk) 13:07, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see your point in the first paragraph, also there were also a number of instances where the colour was manually entered, so, if we reverted my changes, this would still have to be addressed.

However, I am not sure I get your point in the second paragraph. What is the "MEPs table below"? Do you mean the table of member parties that shows, for each member party, the number of MEPs? If so, these numbers aren't the same, as the table does not account for individual MEPs, which the total number does. Am I understanding this wrong? Julius Schwarz (talk) 13:15, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By “individual MEPs” do you mean MEPs not belonging to any political party? Because the tables do include independent politicians. See for example the ECR table. Anyway, that was only one example of how updating these numbers automatically creates inconsistencies in the articles that would still need to be updated manually. Brainiac242 (talk) 13:27, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, maybe I jumped the gun for the colour link. It made sense from my perspective, as it made it easier to copy-paste between pages without having to change the label. But if it really makes it more complicated for other people, then that's not the goal. Down the line, it could be interesting to see whether it makes sense to keep separate the political party module and the data on Wikidata. Maybe some closer integration could be useful.

For MEPs, though, I do maintain that this is a net positive. Not all tables account for individual members (esp. for European political parties) and there is bound to be some discrepancies. But I have seen far too many figures that differed (sometimes three or four different values on the same page) so I do argue that this rationalisation makes sense. Julius Schwarz (talk) 14:06, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about this? You go back to using templates to update the number of MEPs. You can still update this figures automatically without the added difficulty of dealing with Wikidata. But, if other editors think specific cases shouldn’t be updated automatically, and they update them manually, you don’t add the templates back in those cases.

BTW, if you revert the colour links to Wikidata and you have any doubts on how to use the module in those cases where the colour was manually entered, let me know the articles and I’ll take care of it. Brainiac242 (talk) 14:40, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the old way from months ago? That would be a clear step back. We have up-to-date data on Wikidata, and it would really be a pain to have to keep that updated as well as the templates. Julius Schwarz (talk) 15:01, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, you don’t have to do so. But I’ve never seen this kind of information being referenced in Wikipedia from Wikidata, and I can guarantee you most editors aren’t going to go to Wikidata to change a number if they can just remove the link and change it manually. I know I would.

As for the colour links, I do think you should revert the changes. And if you want any integration between the module and Wikidata, you should propose it in the module’s talk page. Brainiac242 (talk) 15:24, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Points well noted. Actually I made a similar change (for MEPs) for the pages of European parties some months ago and it's been really smooth. There have been occasions of people making manual changes, which I dealt with, but these were often changes that should not have been made in the first place (like changes without proper sources). So I would actually propose to keep this in place and to try it out for a while and then take stock.

For the colours, we could revert, but I think it would actually be interesting to make some examples of deeper integration with Wikidata. It does not need to be with the political groups, which I know less, but we could start with European parties. The idea is that people usually more involved with an entity (say, a specific party) than with an item (colours of political parties), so it could be interesting to try and actually move most elements of a few parties to wikidata. That would centralise the information and make it easy to survey. Julius Schwarz (talk) 16:13, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime, we can either revert colour changes for political groups or leave them for the time being, as they are unlikely to change in the medium term. Julius Schwarz (talk) 16:14, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said above:

“In my opinion, this change doesn’t bring any improvement, but it does unnecessarily create a system for these parties that is completely different that for all other parties, in addition to making it more difficult to change and discuss those colours for the many Wikipedia editors that aren’t familiar with the functioning of Wikidata.“

”I do think you should revert the changes. And if you want any integration between the module and Wikidata, you should propose it in the module’s talk page.”

Brainiac242 (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I had read you well the first time around. I'm just trying to get some ideas and examples for improvement going. And I already said that we can indeed revert the colours. I'm just arguing for an open mind and being ok to try changes. Happy to discuss in the module talk page too. Julius Schwarz (talk) 18:03, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Europe of Sovereign Nations (party) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Europe of Sovereign Nations (party) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Europe of Sovereign Nations (party) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pallikari ap' ta Sfakia 18:42, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:EUCommissionercountEuropeanParty

Template:EUCommissionercountEuropeanParty has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 13:39, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. That was kept in case there were issues with the Wikidata pull, but I guess it can be deleted if necessary. Thanks! Julius Schwarz (talk) 13:42, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]