This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to
participate, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project, participate in
relevant discussions, and see
lists of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 16:31, June 25, 2024 (
JST,
Reiwa 6) (Refresh)JapanWikipedia:WikiProject JapanTemplate:WikiProject JapanJapan-related articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
I have just modified one external link on
Kibō no Tō. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
Should there be different articles for the original party and the refoundation? They are technically different parties.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 14:48, 25 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Split. The Japanese Wikipedia has two articles on this set of parties.
ArguaBILL (
talk) 14:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Davide King, since you changed the political position, could you comment on this? The term "centre-right" was specifically describing the historical party, not the party in its curernt form.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 18:55, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Ezhao02, hence why At this time, the party was described as centre-right. There are things that are better discussed in the main body than filled up the infobox. Perhaps there should be different articles.
Davide King (
talk) 19:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
I think they are very clearly different parties, so this page should be split.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 19:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm against splitting the document. Kibō no Tō are not at all different parties, and there were many extreme rightists in the party in 2017.--
삭은사과 (
talk) 00:01, 30 August 2020 (UTC)reply
@
삭은사과: I thought they were legally re-founded when the merger happened. Am I wrong about this? Thanks,
Ezhao02 (
talk) 00:09, 30 August 2020 (UTC)reply
If the party officially/legally dissolved and was re-founded, then I think we should use separate pages.
Helper201 (
talk) 08:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Davide King, do you have a preference for whether the article should be split? I'm wondering if there's a potential notability issue.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 15:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Ezhao02, I really do not know. Could you please link to the two separated articles in the Japanese Wikipedia?
Davide King (
talk) 15:02, 2 October 2020 (UTC)reply
I think the only editor who opposed this split is
삭은사과, who has since retired. Would this count as a consensus, or have too few editors been involved in this discussion? I wonder if, as
Helper201 mentioned, we should connect whatever decision is made to the decisions made for the
DPFP and the
CDPJ.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 15:41, 2 October 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure. Its very subjective really. I'll let you decide. If you are not sure you could always open a
request for comment. I have tried posting about this and related matters on
WikiProject Japan, but haven't received any input as yet from there. It would be helpful if there was a WikiProject Politics of Japan, maybe we should set it up?
Helper201 (
talk) 18:01, 2 October 2020 (UTC)reply
That's a good idea. I'll try to open an RfC (if I remember the process). Thanks,
Ezhao02 (
talk) 23:59, 2 October 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Helper201: Well...
WP:RFCNOT specifically says not to use an RfC for split proposals (like this one). I'll try to ping the editors who have responded to the other discussions instead.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 00:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Pinging editors who have responded to the discussion for the CDPJ.
Ezhao02 (
talk) 00:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Split. Regarding the comment of 삭은사과, the new party is formed by the small minority of the old Kibō no Tō who voted against the merge so the membership is different. Here’s a handy chart: Northern Moonlight | ほっこう 00:39, 3 October 2020 (UTC)reply
Split there is a significantly difference between these two reincarnations
Braganza (
talk) 08:09, 22 December 2022 (UTC)reply