|This template is within the scope of WikiProject Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egypt 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.|
||This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Coalition of Socialist Forces
Coalition of Socialist Forces added. --Smart (talk) 04:44, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
I divided the first section of the template between the major and minor parties as it has been done in the template for tunisian political parties.--Poarps (talk) 16:26, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- I oppose this change. In the case of Egypt, I don't see an adequate criterion to distinguish major and minor parties. It is arbitrary to consider parties with less than six seats minor and parties with six seats or more major. Why six, and not five or seven or eight? When I created the sections in the Tunisian parties template, there used to be a large gap between the PDP (16 out of 217 seats = major) and the PDM (5 seats = minor). This is not the case with Egypt.
- You will see that the parties considered Major in Tunisia have a much bigger share of votes than the Dignity Part in Egypt. Even Al Aridha with 11 out of 217 seats in the Constituent Assembly has more than 5% of the seats. If you would apply the same rule to Egypt, only FJP, Nour and Wafd would be major parties. --RJFF (talk) 16:44, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
- See here. The threshold is 1 percent of all deputies, not the amount of seats.--Poarps (talk) 04:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- BTW, you undid all changes in the article. Please be aware of your changes you did. The number of the seats doesn't count for the whole parliament but for the People's assembly.--Poarps (talk) 04:57, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- The 1% threshold is arbitrarily set by you. You have not provided evidence that parties holding more than 1% of the seats in parliament are considered major parties in Egypt. And I don't see consensus for your differentiation. Neither have you provided evidence that the shortnames of the parties as used by you, e.g. "Social Democratic Party" instead of "Egyptian Social Democratic Party", "Citizen Party" instead of "Egyptian Citizen Party", are more common than the official names. Unless you show that the short names are more commonly used than the official names, we should use the official ones.--RJFF (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- Answering your question on my user talk page: I think that any threshold would be arbitrary, as there is no official or inofficial but commonly accepted threshold in Egyptian politics, as far as I know. If there should be one, please provide evidence. I don't know which parties are considered major or minor in Egypt, and it is not up to us Wikipedia editors to decide. --RJFF (talk) 12:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- I do see a significant gap between the share of seats of Wafd Party and ESDP (with Wafd holding more than twice as many seats than ESDP), so in my view a differentiation here would be least arbitrary. But it would still not be based on WP:Verifiability. And verifiability is Wikipedia's core policy. Why do we have to cluster the parties into two groups? We have indicated the number of seats of each party, so readers can decide themselves which parties they consider major or minor (or medium). --RJFF (talk) 12:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)