[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/Jump to content

Talk:Liberty Korea Party

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Korean name?

[edit]

Does this party have a Korean name? Even the Korean article uses the English name! DHN 20:05, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Han-nara. Progressive(Democratic Labour) and Pro-govt(Uri and Democrats) supporters are pretend to be call that party as ddan-nara(means 'Another-national' in Korean). Peterhansen2032, 12:25, 26 July 2007(KST).

Wow. Just wow.

[edit]

Article's pretty incredibly biased.

Will change when I have time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.178.79.39 (talk) 03:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

As a South Korean citizen(and truly detest this party's policy personally), I do have to mention that, the true image of this party which shown this page should be correct with including the bright side of the party's members, policies, and some historic facts. In outside Korea, people don't realise what the Korean History really was(especially during our faded-page of Military regimes period). However, the time has gone, and this party tries hard to adjust in this democratic era, so I should mention that there are some reason which not just looking as negatively. I've just finished helping this work.Peterhansen2032, 12:20, 26 July 2007(KST).

Main picture

[edit]

The heck? This thing's huge! May need resizing.

Biased

[edit]

This is waaay too biased. --Kuanhui 14:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General Comments

[edit]

Reviewing all the articles on other Korean parties, it appears they all have a rather negative, if not outright biased viewpoint. It doesn't help that much of the info isn't sourced at all, and when they are, they point to a few media articles. Anyone can cite a source, but it doesn't make that point valid. No wonder scholars reject wikipedia as a credible source (although they could and should help out, not just criticize, since more and more people are refering to wikipedia for general information).

Another translation

[edit]

Couldn't the name of this party also be translated as "Korean Nation"? After all, "Han" in Korean commonly refers to Korean things (the native name of Korea, at least in South Korea, is Hanguk; in North Korea it is Chosun). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.227.114 (talk) 16:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's what "grand" stands for; Hanguk is, in a theory, "Grand Nation." —jisok 04:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For future reference, the ambiguity is intentional, but "one" is the official reading rather than "Korean". --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 13:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Party colour

[edit]

Are we going with red or blue for the party colour in info tables and the like? Red is given in this article and seems to be official but blue is being used in a lot of other places for continuity purposes --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 13:16, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sae-nuri Party was in succession to Han-nara Party. And logo color of Sae-nuri Party is Bule. [1] So, we are to use bule color in my opinion. --Idh0854 (talk) 07:17, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In my view the dominant color is red. --RJFF (talk) 11:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page rewrite

[edit]

Due to the many issues with this page, I have decided to start rewriting the page comprehensively at User:Tyrannus Mundi/Saenuri Party, incorporating the useful aspects of the present content. If anyone objects to this please let me know. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 22:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Name of party

[edit]

What does Saenuri mean in English? Why is this party called by its Korean name when all other parties are called by their English names? Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 04:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Saenuri means "new world", and their English name is New Frontier Party (NFP). PBJT (talk) 06:54, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the Saenuri Party has an official English name, would it be advisable to rename this page to New Frontier Party? I see no reason why it should continue to be called by its Korean name. Western media outlets are referring to this party as NFP, as well. Humorahead01 (talk) 07:26, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is Saenuri a "conservative party" or a "right-wing conservative party"?

[edit]

This was taken, somewhat ridiculously, to ANI before being discussed here. While I personally think "right-wing conservative" sounds ridiculous, I might be wrong.

Discuss.

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 12:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hijiri88: Many of reliable sources said that Saenuri is a centre-right party. (including the report published by the House of Commons of the United Kingdom) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

--117.53.77.84 (talk) 14:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And how does this relate to the problem I mentioned above? As far as I'm concerned it's an English problem "right-wing" and "conservative" mean pretty much the same thing, so using both sounds redundant. Does that mean I agree with you? Frankly I already know where you're coming from, and as whether "right-wing" should be added on top of "conservative", I think I agree. I'm more interested in seeing what is motivating User:Travelbybus. (I still suspect it to be nothing more than poor English -- someone who doesn't bother to look up "conservative" in the dictionary and doesn't know it to see, but knows "right-wing" might think that the version you and I prefer is censoring discussion of their political position.) Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 15:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Saenuri Party is a conservative South Korean political party, similar with the Republican Party (United States).Marxistfounder (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Irish and I live in Japan, so comparisons to the GOP are not going to work: am I supposed to read your comparison like the mainstream in my home country would ("Saenuri are a far-right, conservative Christian, pro-war, pro-corporate party"), like liberal Americans would ("Saenuri are conservative") or like conservative Americans would ("Saenuri are not liberal")? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 15:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Marxistfounder: Saenuri is a conservative political party, but its policy (both social and economic) is different from the Republican Party. --117.53.77.84 (talk) 03:06, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Hijiri88: In Wikipedia, right-wing means that radical right party like the UKIP. Also, left-wing means that radical left party like Sinn Fein. Which uses the the term centre-right/left for mainstream right/left. --117.53.77.84 (talk) 03:06, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Travelbybus: --117.53.77.84 (talk) 15:23, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saenuri Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:01, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Saenuri Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:15, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Saenuri Party. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:34, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Saenuri Party. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:39, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New name

[edit]

Liberty Korea Party. Do you really want to use this improper translation? I know that 자유한국당 literally means Liberty Korea Party but hey at least call it Free Korea Party or something. Oppashi (talk) 10:02, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Korea Freedom Party is used by some media. That makes more sense in English. But Liberty Korea is so dominant that it probably has to be that due to the common name rule.--Batmacumba (talk) 12:10, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liberty Korea Party. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:16, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Undue emphasis in lede

[edit]

The mentions of racism, etc. and especially "pro-military dictatorship" seem to me to be given undue emphasis since the sources focus on individuals rather than the party as a whole. These should probably be moved into the body of the article. --Yellow Diamond Δ Direct Line to the Diamonds 04:57, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Yellow Diamond: Firstly I want to thank for your input. I suggest you to read source about paleo conservatism. I think the source can provide provide enough answer to your question. Thank you. Jeff6045 (talk) 05:55, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As for the news aggregator, isn't it best practices to look at the sources it cites itself, such as the guardian article it references?--Yellow Diamond Δ Direct Line to the Diamonds 04:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also what source are you referring to on paleoconservatism? The one on this page? I can't speak Korean, so I'm not sure what that source actually says. --Yellow Diamond Δ Direct Line to the Diamonds 04:21, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Political position

[edit]
The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
There is no consensus for the proposed change to the "Political position" or |position= parameter of the infobox, from "Right-wing to far-right" to "Right-wing". Editors examining the sources did not agree that the sources presented met the burden and onus required to change the language to "right-wing" (omitting "far-right") in wikivoice. While consensus can change, a future proposal to change the political position label used in the article is unlikely to achieve consensus unless the sources using the new proposed label are equivalent or better, in scope and in quality, than the sources supporting the label currently used in the article. – Levivich [dubious – discuss] 06:57, 7 March 2020 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]


I propose that the political position in the infobox be changed to state "Right-wing" instead of "Right-wing to far-right". Ezhao02 (talk) 01:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

I propose changing the political position to say "Right-wing" as opposed to "Right-wing to far-right". The reasoning is that this party's political position ranges from center-right to far-right, and the label "right-wing" balances the different positions the best. It has been argued that the sources that label the party as center-right[1][2][3][4] are generally older sources and are outdated, especially since a more moderate faction split from the party to form the Bareun Party, thus justifying the listing of "Center-right to right-wing" as a historical position. However, there are sources written after the split that characterize the party as center-right.[5][6][7] Thus, this argument should be considered invalid, and "right-wing" is still the best way to balance the political positions of the various factions. ​​ Ezhao02 (talk) 18:35, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let's look at the sources which are referring the "LKP" as centre-right.

1. Bloomberg source
This is just person's opinion. Opinion is not reliable in WP. (Please read WP:NOR)

2. Sputnik
The articles is written by foreign journalists with little connection to South korea; characteristically, they only mention the LKP in passing. I think the source is quite low-quality to change party's political spectrum. (Please see the talk page about Progress Party. Right-wing populist and far-right labels have been denied for same reason.)

3. Other sources
Other sources are referring the Saenuri Party or Grand National party as centre right. These sources are outdated.

Please see the sources in the article that are used to describe the party as far-right. Some of them are not just mentioning the party as far-right but they are actually showing party's close relationship with far-right group or party's shift to far-right. The sources that you have given are quite low quality to change party's political spectrum. Thank you. Jeff6045 (talk) 22:59, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff6045: It's not fair to characterize sources as outdated just because they refer to the party's former name. A name change is not necessarily a change in ideology. Rather, all of these sources were published after the Bareun Party's split from the LKP; the split would have a much greater impact of ideology and political position, yet these sources continue to refer to the party as center-right. Ezhao02 (talk) 04:12, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ezhao02:
The official date of the party's split is 25 January 2017. The source that refers the Saenuri as centre-right is written in 19 January 2017. Also I'm keep saying that the sources that you have given are quite low-quality. The sources only mention the LKP or Saenuri in passing. I suggest you to give source that describe why the party is centre-right.
Ps: After the Hong Jun-pyo was elected as leader of LKP, the party has been increasingly working with far-right group. Please see the source about far-right in the article. Jeff6045 (talk) 05:39, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff6045: Let's take a look at the sources used to refer to the party as "far-right".
  • UPI source, Newser source, both Korea Herald sources: mention "far-right" in passing, which, as you said, does not make a high-quality source.
  • Channel NewsAsia source: calls the party "ultraconservative", not "far-right"; "ultraconservative" should be used to cite "paleoconservatism", if anything
  • Sino NK source: "hard-right" is not the same as "far-right", and this source is describing factions usually "associated" with the party
  • Pressian source: This is the reporter's opinion.
  • Korea Times sources: These sources do describe a shift of the party to the right, considering its greater acceptance of far-right groups. There are a few problems with using these sources to describe the party itself as far-right, however. First, acceptance of far-right groups into the party only means that far-right factions are growing in the party, not that the party is far-right as a whole. Second, the sources do not explain why these groups are far-right, other than describing them as Park Geun-hye supporters, which does not necessarily make them far-right. Last but not least, a mainstream center-right or right-wing political party can easily have far-right factions. Just that this party has (allegedly) large far-right factions does not mean that the party as a whole is not center-right or simply right-wing.

I know that some of the sources I provided to support a description of "center-right" are not the best, but the sources used to describe the party as "far-right" are not any better. I still view "Right-wing" as the best compromise between these positions. Perhaps we could list "Factions: Centre-right to far-right" under it. I hope that we can consider my suggestion. Ezhao02 (talk) 15:39, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ezhao02:
1.Ultra-conservative≠ far-right?
Please see the article about Law and Justice. Ultra-conservative is widely use to refer far-right.

2. Opinion source
Pressian source is not an opinion, please read the source better.

3. The party has centre-right faction?
The party itslef denied centre-right position. They're describing their party as right-wing.[8] Can you give any reliable sources that describe the party as centre-right in 2019 or party includes centre-right as faction?

4. "I know that some of the sources I provided to support a description of "center-right" are not the best, but the sources used to describe the party as "far-right" are not any better."
Seriously? You have given sources that describe the party as center-right which are written in 2017 and only mentioning the party in the pass. Beside current sources that are used to describe party's far-right position are mostly written in 2019 and expressing concern of party's shift to far-right.

In addition I suggest you to read source from YTN. It clearly shows party's shift to far-right. Jeff6045 (talk) 00:36, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

​
  1. Ultra-conservative≠far-right: Sources used on the Law and Justice page that describe the party as ultraconservative should also not be used to cite a far-right political position. While we should take precedents set on other articles into account, we should also be careful not to emulate incorrect usage. (see the essay WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)
  2. Reading through the Pressian article, it does seem like an opinion article, since the author "offers advice" to the party. However, even if this is not an opinion source, the article is describing the party as turning towards far-right factions, which does not make the party itself far-right.
  3. Even if the party itself denies a center-right position and calls itself right-wing, we should not automatically assume that the party is not center-right. This would be using primary sources incorrectly.
  4. I have found this source,[9] last updated December 2019, describing the party as center-right to right-wing.

Ezhao02 (talk) 04:03, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think the party is clearly "far-right" about it. Sometimes there will be a handful of articles reporting "centre-right," but I don't think it reflects the Liberty Korea Party's actual policy. Because it is not a Western political party in the first place and because it was "centre-right" in the past, it is highly likely that he did not know it and called it that way. Therefore, I do not think 'far-right' should be removed from the document.--삭은사과 (talk) 04:25, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ezhao02:
1. Centre-right source The source that you have suggested is 2017 version. Please see the article about Justice Party (South Korea).

2. Pressian source
Do you really read the article properly? The source is clearly sying the party has become like far-right 대한애국당.

3. Ultra-conservative
If you think ultra conservative doesn't refer the far-right please discuss on talk page.

I think this discussion will be endless between two of us. I want to politly suggest you that we should wait until other users join the discussion. Let's stop discussing the issue until various users reveal their input. Thank you. Jeff6045 (talk) 07:00, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ezhao02:: I'm discussing the use of ultraconservative to cite "far-right" right now. This is just factually incorrect. Ultraconservative could just mean right-wing in a context where the main conservative party is center-right. It could also mean far-right in other contexts.
I agree with you that we should seek other users' input. In the meantime, would you be willing to look for recent sources describing the party as center-right (in any language) or for scholarly sources (not just news articles) describing the party as far-right? Thanks, Ezhao02 (talk) 15:17, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
At least there are a number of sources in South Korea calling the LKP "Far-right," but it is hard to find any source who calls it "Centre-right." The LKP is also denying that it is "Centre-right." The articles calling the LKP "Centre-right" are likely foreigners with low quality and who do not know that the party has become radical since 2017. That is why the LKP's political position is "Right-wing to far-right."--삭은사과 (talk) 22:53, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ezhao02:: Recently, the main opposition Liberty Korea Party organized violent rallies at the National Assembly. This even led the DP/JP to file a complaint against the Liberty Korea Party.[10][11] Hong Joon-pyo, a former LKP leader is remarks "Trump, Xi Jinping, Abe and Putin are all far-right ultra-nationalists, so we need a right-wing ultra-nationalist Strongman leader." This is even recognized by the far-right journalist Chosun Ilbo.[12] and There are a lot of Korean articles calling the current party leader 황교안 An "far-right"[13]. Not a few have spoken in support of the conversion therapy of homosexuality[14], Many major South Korean politicians also refer to the LKP as the extreme right. (Even members of the center-right Bareun Party have called the LKP the extreme right).[15][16][17][18][19][20] Even 정두언 who even served as a lawmaker from the ruling Saenuri Party before changing his party name to the main opposition Liberty Korea Party, accused the LKP of being full of far-right forces.[21] the current leader of the party, is the extreme right. South Korea is a conservative country, but the LKP is never recognized as "centre-right" even among mainstream politicians in the public. The "centre-right" within the party has no leadership and is often moved or defected to another party. This party is now clearly in absolute control by the far right.--삭은사과 (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ezhao02: what is your brief and neutral statement? At over 4,000 bytes, the statement above (from the {{rfc}} tag to the next timestamp) is far too long for Legobot (talk · contribs) to handle, and so it is not being shown correctly at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law. The RfC will also not be publicised through WP:FRS until a shorter statement is provided. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 00:44, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: Did I do this correctly? Ezhao02 (talk) 01:20, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ezhao02:
Ok. I will search some sources. Jeff6045 (talk) 00:51, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That the LKP is far-right is by no means a political calumny. Currently, the LKP is far-right in South Korean standards, but also far-right in international standards. (Ex. racist,[22] homophobic,[23][24] xenophobic[25] and pro-military dictatorship[26]) Also explained above, LKP lawmakers staged violent disturbances in December 2019 in Congress. If this isn't the far right, what is it? YTN or JTBC is South Korea's representative news broadcast, but neither YTN nor JTBC is considered left-leaning.--삭은사과 (talk) 05:09, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Manyin, Mark E. (2003), South Korean Politics and Rising "Anti-Americanism": Implications for U.S. Policy Toward North Korea (PDF), Congressional Research Service, archived (PDF) from the original on October 11, 2011
  2. ^ The Economist, print edition, April 11, 2008, South Korea's election: A narrow victory for the business-friendly centre-right Archived October 18, 2014, at the Wayback Machine, Accessed Oct 19, 2013.
  3. ^ Cronin, Patrick M. (2009), Global Strategic Assessment 2009: America's Security Role in a Changing World, INSS, ISBN 9780160876554, archived from the original on January 28, 2018
  4. ^ Global Security: Japan and Korea; Tenth Report of Session 2007-08, House of Commons of the United Kingdom, 2008, ISBN 9780215525130, archived from the original on January 28, 2018
  5. ^ Wijaya, Muhammad Eka; Billah, Meer Sadeq; Ahn, Heejune (2017-11-14). "Political attitude estimation through Facebook like: a South Korean case study". Asian Journal of Political Science. 26 (1): 87–102. doi:10.1080/02185377.2017.1402357. ISSN 0218-5377. The Saenuri Party (the ruling party) practices center-right and conservative political views…
  6. ^ Novak, Parker (2017-01-19). "What's Next for South Korea's Center-Right?". The Diplomat.
  7. ^ Feldman, Noah (2017-03-12). "South Korea Does Impeachment Right". Bloomberg News. …Park's center-right Liberty Korea Party is opposed by the center-left Together Democratic Party.
  8. ^ "한국당 과도한 우클릭…새보수당, '중도보수' 확보하나". 29 December 2019.
  9. ^ "South Korea: Economic and Political Outline". Santander Trade Portal. December 2019. Liberty Korea Party (LKP) : centro-direita, direita…
  10. ^ http://www.fnnews.com/news/201912171505485206
  11. ^ http://www.polinews.co.kr/news/article.html?no=442624
  12. ^ http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2017/03/15/2017031502755.html
  13. ^ http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/hanitv/hanitv_general/919007.html
  14. ^ https://www.hankyung.com/society/article/2018092074301
  15. ^ https://news.joins.com/article/21741037
  16. ^ https://www.nocutnews.co.kr/news/4733806
  17. ^ http://www.jrnews.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=2130
  18. ^ http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/assembly/921739.html
  19. ^ https://www.nocutnews.co.kr/news/5090796
  20. ^ http://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/politics_general/921578.html
  21. ^ http://www.gobalnews.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=23728
  22. ^ "Hwang's racist comment is spreading through far-right youtubers.(In Korean)". Media Today. 1 August 2019.
  23. ^ "LKP's Homophobia(In Korean)". hankookilbo. 24 May 2019.
  24. ^ "Min Kyeon-wook, member of LKP's'coming out' comment raises dispute about Homophobia". YTN. 20 May 2019.
  25. ^ "Kimn Jin-tae "People who applied refugee status should be ousted by force."". News1. 11 July 2018.
  26. ^ "Na Kyung-won's comment about good dictatorship and bad dictatorship". JTBC. 3 May 2019.

Responses

[edit]

Oppose: As mentioned above, the LPK is also a party often considered 'far-right' by South Korean centre-right politicians. And there are similar cases in which the party was originally a center-right party but turned into a far-right party.(See also. Fidesz)--삭은사과 (talk) 10:55, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support as proposer: As mentioned above, the LKP broadly has factions ranging from center-right to far-right and is the major right-wing party in South Korea, with a center-right faction splitting from it around the beginning of 2017. Ezhao02 (talk) 03:15, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: There are no such sources to claim that LKP has centre-right factions. Also as mentioned above the party itself denied centre-right label. In addition the sources that are suggested to describe the party's centre-right is quite low-quality or out dated. (Which describe the party's historical position.) Jeff6045 (talk) 06:24, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I would like to point out that one of the sources listed above, Sputnik, is not regarded as a reliable source to use for citations on Wikipedia. Please see WP:RSP, where this source is listed, for more information. Many of the other sources listed I have never heard of and seem to be small websites and their reputations and accuracy may be questionable. We should go by established reliable sources. WP:RELIABILITY. Helper201 (talk) 10:24, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think labeling parties "far" anything is easily cherry picked and sources involved almost always do so for political reasons ("They're not like you normal people, they're FAR right/left!"). At this stage of political discourse right and left are somewhat outdated anyway, but since Wikipedia is still using them the term "far" should be avoided. Edit5001 (talk) 03:47, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]


  • There's no need to stuff the infobox with potentially controversial things. "Right-wing" is concise, neutral, and in accordance with the available sources. The "far-right" faction, to the extent that some sources believe it exists, should be discussed in the article, but we don't need that in the infobox. Support-AsianFire- (talk) 06:05, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - They're fairly self evidently far-right, many sources refer to them as such. Bacondrum (talk) 00:45, 11 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Highly disapprove of the line of argument that since labeling an organization "far-right" is controversial, it should be avoided even when there is sufficient evidence to support the claim. The party's strong anti-immigrant, Christian far-right stance, and conspiratorial tack since the impeachment has been well documented and cited. To remove it to satisfy vague appeal for "neutrality," and citing Sputnik article to support that position seriously undermines the argument. Aixaurinoko (talk) 13:13, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Even though Sputnik is not a reliable source, other sources continue to describe the party as center-right, as discussed above. Ezhao02 (talk) 15:40, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- Sputnik (news agency) is widely considered as russian government's propaganda in WP. (Please see WP:RSP.) The source should be excluded. Also there are no any recent sources that describe the party as centre-right. Jeff6045 let's talk! 23:08, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I've removed the Sputnik source for obvious problems, but there are additional sources describing the party as center-right.[1][2]

Comment: I have found another source that describe the party as far-right. [3] Jeff6045 let's talk! 23:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I don't think there's any more participants. Can we close Talk now?--삭은사과 (talk) 09:13, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Seoul, Peter Murtagh in. "Tactical nuclear missiles mooted by South Korean opposition". The Irish Times. Retrieved 2020-01-29.
  2. ^ "ROKing the Boat: US Nuclear Weapons in South Korea?". RUSI. 2017-08-22. Retrieved 2020-01-29.
  3. ^ "South Korea's new president will face challenges from all directions". The Conversation. 8 May 2017.
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.

Why don't you change the heading of the document to "Future Integration Party"?

[edit]

They are currently trying to change the party's name from the "자유한국당" to the "미래통합당".

Although they claim to be a three-party merger of "Onward for Future 4.0," "New Conservative Party" and "Liberty Korea Party," Officially it seems to be done by putting the Liberty Korea Party as its parent and merging the other two parties.--삭은사과 (talk) 09:24, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:39, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Korean wikipedia page ideology factions?

[edit]

So, I think it is that? There is a Faction Ideology on the Korean Wikipedia page, I wanted the Liberty Party Korea to add the Ideology of the factions (not Paleoconservatism or Neoconservatism), How like the Korean Wikipedia page. Rodionov Erel (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

In the link to the evidence that currently states that it is far-right, the statement that the 'Liberal Korea Party' is far-right does not clearly state or has incorrect (biased) evidence.

Also, I don't know why the accusations against certain politicians were written in the political position of the Liberty Korea Party.

For this reason, I am going to remove the far-right narrative. 1alskd1 (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Ideology" parametre

[edit]

I think the parametre needs slimming down to:

  • Conservatism (South Korean)
  • Right-wing populism

The reason why I think populism should stay is because it is was fairly new for conservatism in South Korea, at the time, while the removed ideologies are a part of the conservatism movement in South Korea. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 20:57, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liberty_Korea_Party&oldid=1208170476"