Misplaced Pages

Talk:Scottish National Party: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:32, 3 October 2007 editFrancis Tyers (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,572 edits →30th Sep Edits - Controversy section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 15:49, 24 November 2024 edit undoJaggedHamster (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,488 edits Restored revision 1256969738 by Tom.Reding (talk): Unclear what is meantTags: Twinkle Undo Mobile edit Mobile web edit 
(461 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WP Scotland|class=B|importance=high}}
{{Scottish English}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=other|class=B|1=
{{WikiProject Scotland|importance=high}}
{{WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom|importance=top}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=high|political-parties=yes}}
{{WikiProject Socialism|importance=low}}
}}
{{Annual readership |expanded=true|scale=log}}
<!-- Metadata: see ] -->
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 4
|algo = old(180d)
|archive = Talk:Scottish National Party/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{Annual readership}}
{{Archives}}


== Pro-Europeanism ==
==Origin of the SNP symbol/logo?==


Some clarity needs to be drawn here. Is this a question of "pro-Europeanism" or "pro-European Union".
Can anyone shed any light on its origin? <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:07, 5 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Political parties can be pro-European, and anti-EU. ] (]) 15:39, 21 September 2016 (GMT)


Why is their no moniker in the side-column at the top clearly indicating that the SNP is "pro-EU"/"Remain party"?
People say it is the saltire, a thistle or a drop of oil depending. Nothing definitive, I am afraid. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 12:23, 16 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== Political Ideology ==
==1979 general election==
From the article:


There seems an extraordinary number of entries in the Info Box under Ideology, presently 8. The Infobox is for simple facts and not the place to be having this sort of almost discussion. For context check out any other major party in the UK they have 2 maybe three entries.
:''Many figures lay the blame for there being a general election at all in 1979 on the SNP''
Whereas many of the topics raised are very interesting they belong in the ideology section in the article and not cluttering up the infobox.
I would propose to reduce these entries to 2 or 3 and the others transferred to ideology section. Tidies up infobox and allows for fuller discussion on topics of ideology for those that wish it. ] (]) 12:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)


:IMO a workable streamlining would be to list ], ] and ], in that order, for three ideologies, and a two ideology solution would be simply Scottish nationalism and social democracy. (] is a policy goal, not an ideology, and is basically redundant with Scottish nationalism.)-- ] (]) 13:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I do not know how many figures, and who they are, but since the ] government would have passed the five year mark since the October 1974 election that year, I think they may be fans of Anthony Wells' entertaining fantasy ''What if Gordon Banks had Played for England'' :-) -- ] 18:23, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)


::I strongly support Scottish independence and Scottish nationalism remaining in the infobox. The rest in my view are subject to debate around moving into the main body. I think "big tent" could possibly be a good one to keep in the infobox, since the party has often generally been portrayed as a broad group united around the themes of Scottish nationalism and Scottish independence. In regards to social democracy stated above, the most recent source we have for this is coming up on 8-years-old in June, with the other sources for this claim years older than that, so it’s debatable whether that means it merits such a place of prominence as the infobox or its prominence in the opening of the article. ] (]) 17:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Whilst I do not disagree with you Alan, many Labour Party activists in Scotland quite often state this as their belief (whether they actually believe it or use it as a campaign tool against the SNP is another matter). --
:::This still holds true. I replaced a primary source with sources that call SNP social-democratic, from 2023 and 2021 respectively. ] 17:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
] 12.29pm, 23 Feb 2004
::::Thank you, good work!— ] (]) 17:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::Cheers. ] (]) 17:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Well, isn’t “Scottish independence” a policy goal, not a distinct political ideology? Even if one considers it an ideology, it’s a component of Scottish nationalism. As for “big tent”, it’s still a predominantly centre-left party, and hasn’t altered its ideological stance in the last decade. One could just as equally state the Tory or Labour or LibDem parties are equally as much “big tents” as the SNP.— ] (]) 17:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
::::I'd argue Scottish independence is distinct from Scottish nationalism. The Scottish Greens for instance are pro-independence but make a distinction by explicitly not referring to what they represent as nationalism. I think it’s fair to say the SNP are generally centre-left, however, I think the breadth of opinion (i.e. elected SNP representatives with socially conservative views and the contrasting social views of the leadership candidates in the 2023 leadership election) in the SNP is greater than that which would be seen in other major parties like the Lib Dems. You'd be unlikely to find many socially conservative or socialist Liberal Democrats for instance. Yet my understanding is there are elected SNP representatives that span a range of political ideologs and positions, including socialist to conservative. This is in part demonstrated by the fact we have multiple sources referring to the party's big tent nature. ] (]) 17:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::Literally the same could be said about Labour (and Plaid and the NI parties, etc), predominantly centre-left parties with groups and members with views to the right the general party position (which in the SNP’s case is to the left of Labour, if that matters). As for the Scottish Greens, this really isn’t the place for that discussion, but they might avoid the n-word for understandable reasons, but they’re still espousing Scottish nationalism.— ] (]) 20:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::Basically what I am trying to say, parties often have broad ranges of views, particularly parties of government. However, one would still refer to the Conservative party as centre-right, Labour as centre-left, etc, despite being “big tents” in themselves. With the SNP, I can’t agree with “big tent” alone as its political position, as that implies being a catch-all party spanning both left and right in equal measures, when it’s pretty much a typical European socdem party in many ways. The party hasn’t changed ideology in the last 8 or so years, and hasn’t significantly since the influence of the 79 Group.— ] (]) 21:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::::I think there may have been a misunderstanding here. I'm not saying that "big tent" should be its political position in the infobox. I agree with maintaining centre-left in that respect. I'm just saying "big tent" should probably be retained where it currently exists in the ''ideologies section'' of the infobox (with the retention of centre-left for the political position section). Though I'm more steadfast in the retention of Scottish nationalism and Scottish independence in the ideology section. ] (]) 22:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
::::::::Do we have sources for "big tent", though? — ''']''' <sup>''(])''</sup> 07:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)


::I would have just ] and ]—and nothing else. I am especially opposed to ] (not an ideology, but a political goal or policy), ] (meaning really little), ] (redundant and partially inaccurate), ] (again, not an ideology, but a political goal or policy) and ] (not an ideology, not even a position). --] (]) 06:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
An example of how even people who lived through an event can suffer from "false memory syndrome".
::Additionally, I support only "centre-left" as political position—and "big tent" is not a political position. --] (]) 06:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:Well that seems to have generated some discussion, broadly (if I have followed the discussion correctly) there is broad agreement that Ideology in Infobox requires trimming, 2 or 3 entries seem to be floated as preferred.
:We perhaps should also be looking at the number and quality of the references, many appear to have little if any relationship to the heading they are linked.
:My tuppence worth
:Almost all the reference should be removed, they add little (if anything) to the already existing internal Misplaced Pages popup, and in fact most are to Amazon pages where you can buy the book supposedly referenced - hardly supporting particular position.
:RETAIN Civic Nationalism _ maintain this and remove references
:REMOVE Scottish Independence - Policy aim not an ideology
:RETAIN Social democracy - remove unhelpful references
:REMOVE Scottish nationalism - already covered by Civic Nationalism
:REMOVE Left-wing populism - not an ideology
:REMOVE Regionalism - not an ideology
:REMOVE Pro-Europeanism - Policy not Ideology
:REMOVE Big tent - not an ideology ] (]) 06:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::{{U|Czello}}, there's three sources for "big tent" in the infobox. ] (]) 16:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::I actually want to challenge the notion that these three sources really prove what they're supposed to prove. Namely that SNP is a "big tent" party in a way that other parties in the UK are not.
:::Let's start with the second source - ''The Scottish National Party Is Espousing A Multicultural Brand Of Nationalism'' by Joanna Kakissis on npr.org. What does it say? That "Unlike the anti-immigration, isolationist nationalist parties splintering the European Union, the Scottish National Party promotes a a "big tent" brand of nationalism." By this Kakissis means that SNP's nationalism positions itself "against England rather than against Europe, whereas English nationalism is defined against Europe." So the party promotes "big tent nationalism", but the party itself is not described as big tent.
:::Third source - ''Mr Scotland, chauvinism and the SNP’s big-tent nationalism'' by Jason Cowley, newstatesman.com. The reveal is in the title - "Mr Scotland, chauvinism and the SNP’s big-tent nationalism". Well, what is "big-tent nationalism"? One thing is certain - it is a radically different statement from "SNP is a big-tent party".
:::The first source - ''A Nation Changed? The SNP and Scotland Ten Years On'' by Gerry Hassan and Simon Barrow took some time to actually reach, since it's a book. But it does THE SAME THING - that rather than calling SNP "big-tent", it merely says that it has "big tent nationalism", by which it means that the nationalism of the party appeals to "every region, area and social group in Scotland". (p. 18). It also calls SNP social-democratic, stating that "the SNP has also achieved some success in defining its social democracy as more authentic than Labour’s under Blair and Brown." (p. 435).
:::As such, I want to say that this is ] and does not actually prove what it is supposed to prove. ] 16:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
::::We seem to be starting to distil the issues here,
::::1 What is the InfoBox for? IMHO it is meant to provide quick headline information and really is not suitable for references that maybe more appropriate in the text about ideology.
::::2 What is Ideology - we seem to have broad agreement about what it is not, its not Policy. Its things like Civic Nationism and Social Democracy
::::It is good to see such a healthy discussion carried out in a reasoned, sensible and courteous manner (hope I haven't jinxed it) ] (]) 19:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
:::::All positive contributions in good faith, so no problems there.— ] (]) 11:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
I think it’s important to remember that it’s possible to be nationalist without supporting independence, which is one of the reasons I support the inclusion of Scottish independence in the infobox. The two are not one and the same. ] (]) 21:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)


:What is Scottish nationalism in pursuit of? Nationhood, i.e. independence.— ] (]) 14:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Callaghan's defeat in '79 has been blamed on
::Nationalism isn't inherently like that, nor is nationalism always defined as the pursuit of a nation. It can simply be the promotion of the interests of a certain people or nation, not necessarily a pursuit of independence for said nation. This includes Scottish nationalism. ] (]) 07:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
:::Surely, Scottish nationalism is the party's main ideology. I would have also social democracy, though, and nothing else. --] (]) 12:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
:There in is one of the concern I have about the use of language, "Nationalist" has many negative connotations more usually being used to describe "blood & soil" type movements, what ever you may think of the SNP is it most certainly not that. It is in part why I think Civil Nationalist is a more accurate description.
:Think we may be moving to some broad agreement and believe we should seriously prune many of the entries under Ideology, 2 maybe 3 to me seem to sum up the salient points.
:Social Democratic
:Civic Nationalism
:I could be persuaded re Independence, yes it is a policy but in this case it is also the prime reason for the party existing. ] (]) 13:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)


::"Civic" or "civil nationalism" means little, while "Scottish nationalism" is precisely what the SNP stands for. --] (]) 14:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Callaghan's decision not to go to the polls in '78
:::This. Social democracy and Scottish nationalism are the main ideologies of the party, and I can find more sources for both if needed.
- the winter of discontent
:::I have no idea why we would do "civic nationalism", not to mention that I have a feeling it will be hard to find sources that explicitly call SNP that, meaning that we would use a rather obscure/rare descriptor of the SNP's ideology. And why? To me not only does this appear to be a vague term, but also an euphemism of sorts, amongst political circles where "nationalism" is a dirty word.
- public spending cuts alienating core Labour supporters
:::But the thing is, SNP is a Scottish nationalist party. It is not pejorative, nor is it positive. It is neutral, and simply a matter of fact. ] 18:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- the SNP voting against the Govt
::::"SNP is a Scottish nationalist party" you make my case for me by naming a non existing party, SNP is the Scottish '''National''' Party. See how easy that can happen, the correct ideology is Civic Nationalism ] (]) 07:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

:::::I was not naming a party. I was describing its ideology. This is the talk page of the ]. Have you seen the opening sentence of the article?
Which option one chooses depends on one's politics rather than the facts - which suggest all these factors and others contributed to the result, but none is a full explanation IN ITSELF.
:::::{{blockquote|'''The Scottish National Party''' (SNP; Scots: Scots National Pairty, Scottish Gaelic: Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta na h-Alba ) '''is a Scottish nationalist''' and social democratic political '''party'''.}}

:::::That the main ideology of the SNP is Scottish nationalism can be easily confirmed by a plethora of sources. For the sake of simplicity, I will name one - ''The Modern SNP: From Protest to Power'' by Gerry Hassan, which states (page 5):
A similar bit of historical revisionism is being applied by anti-Blairites claiming that Blair cannot claim any credit for the election victories of 1997 and 2001. I'm afraid we can't travel in a time machine and find out whether Labour would have won in '97 if Smith had survived (how?????) or if Prescott had been leader (Prescott, of course, being one of the shining beacons of success in the Labour Government's record - irony mode off). Evidence does suggest that Blair was a decisive factor in the large pro-Labour swing amongst the middle class and "C1C2"s. But in reality, who knows?
:::::{{blockquote|The SNP’s ‘doctrine’ is formally social democratic, while its ‘ethos’, the party’s sense of itself, is Scottish nationalist.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Modern SNP: From Protest to Power |publisher=Edinburgh University Press |year=2009 |page=5 |isbn=978-0-7486-3991-5 |first=Gerry |last=Hassan}}</ref>}}

:::::I have to admit, I see this as lack of reading comprehension. If I wanted to state the name of the party, I would say: "SNP is the Scottish National Party". I would capitalize all parts of the party name, and I would use "the" instead of "a". I am sure you know this.
Whether or not the ] led to the downfall of the ] government and led to 12 years of crushing ] upon this country is irrelevant. The Scottish National Party is againt the ] stabbing ] in the back, much as it is against ] stabbing Scotland in the back. Whoever it is makes '''NO''' difference. Although, the fact that it was a ''Labour'' party stabbing the people who voted for it in the back makes it a little worse. The Tories never claimed to stand for Scotland, much as they will try to tell you. Labour did. My family (extended, bar very few exceptions) voted Labour from 79-97. They (Labour, not my family), again, true to form, stabbed this country in the back. I use this metaphor again, as it's true. We brought down the Callaghan government, because it stabbed Scotland in the back. We will bring down '''ANY''' ] government if it is stabbing Scotland in the back. It is because we want independence...and every British government stabs Scotland in the back, And that's not because I have a chip on my shoulder, thats not because I'm anti-English, that is another story. So before every bleeding heart New-Labourite blames us for ] -
:::::I do not think your case for "civic nationalism" is clear. How many sources can you find that explicitly call SNP a civic nationalist party? Remember that we cannot do ]. I do not see the case for this being the defining ideology of the SNP - that would be Scottish nationalism and social democracy instead.

:::::{{reftalk}} ] 10:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

== "]" listed at ] ==
blame yourself.
]

The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Scottish Nose Pickers}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] ] 15:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
{{Election box metadata}}
== "]" listed at ] ==

]
==Second in polls==
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Scottish Nose-pickers}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] ] 15:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Is the SNP still second in the polls? reports this quote from Alex Salmond:
== "]" listed at ] ==
"In addition, this morning's poll shows the SNP already leading the race for the Scottish Parliament in 2007, which is an extremely encouraging sign indeed for the party at this stage."
]
Is the article intro still appropriate? --] 04:34, 9 May 2005 (UTC) (a ] interested in the Scots)
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12#Scottish Nose-pickers}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> ] ] 15:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

There have been very few polls that suggest the SNP has ever been in a better position than Labour and as such they can usually be attributed to the inherent margin of error in these matters.

Scotland is effectively a one party state. It has been for a long time. --] 06:44, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

But - whose fault is that? The Conservatives were in a very strong position in Scotland
from the 1920s to the 1950s - what happened to them? They had picked up a large %age of the votes from the demise of the Liberals after WW1 but only seemed to retain them for one generation. It's not Labour's fault that they continue to be the largest party
in election after election

] 19:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

== Category:Scottish National Party (SNP) politicians ==

I have just created this category:

I have addded a lot of SNP MSPs/MPs/other politicians to it, but if there's any I've missed please feel free to add them. It includes current and former members of the SNP, so far 51 articles are in this category. ] 19:55, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

== Minor Points ==

- The address given as Edinburgh Scotland seems a tad POVish. If Scotland is to be included in the address (it is obvious, I don't believe it is necessary) it should be before the Postcode. If you were going to put in United Kingdom that may be another matter.

- Pantone 300 is not the official colour of the Saltire. There is no official colour beyond Blue/Azure.

:No, but the Scots Parliament did strongly suggest Pantone 300 to be used for the Saltire in recent years. <span style="background-color: #008000"><font color="#ffffff">]</font></span> 07:23, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

== Party colours? ==

It is my understanding that the SNP commonly uses 3 colours in their publicity material: the main one being yellow; but also "heather" (which I assume that most people would call either a light purple or a dark lilac?) and also a Pantone-300-ish blue (ie. the colour of the Saltire). An IP address just removed the link to blue, so I wondered if maybe the SNP have stopped using blue in their publications? Does anybody know?

I do not think that it is sensible to put "black" as one of the party's colours: every political party in the world commonly uses black, white and grey in their publications: these are tones, nor colours. --] 10:02, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

==Edits 5th May ==
The intro was changed to give precedence to historical data over current information, this is out of keeping with other UK political parties, the ] doesnt mention the fact that it has historically been the 2nd party,but recent form has put it on top in the UK parliament. Should this discontinuity remain? ] 15:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

== To what are we comparing the SNP? ==

While of course Guest9999's edits, as to the SNP's strength in various parliamentary bodies, are accurate, I nonetheless think that they obscure the more important facts. After all, the SNP ''only'' competes for constituencies in Scotland. The previous version was more indicative of their overall success in the pursuit of such seats. Thus my non-vehement revert. ] 03:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

== SNP-related category has been nominated for deletion ==

<div class="messagebox standard-talk" style="text-align:center;">
The related ''']''' has been nominated for '''deletion]''' You are encouraged to join the ''']''' on the ] page. <!-- Generated by Template:Cfdnotice -->
</div>

One of its parent categories, ], has also been proposed for deletion.

Please visit the ''']''' and contribute to the discussion.

Please note that although the CFD terminology is "merge", de facto this means deletion. Lovely ]... --] 02:44, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

== Repeated attempts to delete photo of Alex Salmond ==

Two photos of Salmond have already been deleted.

Please contribute to discussion at:
*]
Ta. --] 18:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

== Pictures of SNP leaders ==
Please review the following:
<blockquote>
Peter Murrell <peter.murrell@snp.org>
to me
show details
5:46 am (15 hours ago)
You may use the images at:

http://www.snp.org/media/2007-03-15-alex-and-nicola-photos/SNP%207-3-07-3.jpg/view

-----Original Message-----
From: snphq@snp.org
Sent: 24 July 2007 16:04
To: peter.murrell@snp.org
Subject:
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject: Misplaced Pages and the SNP
From: "Canaen"
Date: Sat, July 14, 2007 7:45 am
To: snp.hq@snp.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi there,

My name's Canaen, I'm an editor at Misplaced Pages, the free, online
Encyclopedia that anyone can edit. One of the things about running a free
encyclopedia, is that all of our images must be free to be used for any
purpose.

We endeavor to have a portrait picture of all prominent people who we've
articles about, and Alex Salmond is one such person (his article can be
found at http://en.wikipedia.org/Alex_Salmond). For some reason or
other, it's been terribly difficult for us to find any image of Alex which
is free to use for any purpose, and thus his article is not illustrated. If
anyone at the SNP would be able to supply us with an image of Alex, either
in the Public domain or licensed under a free license, we could add it to
the article, and it would help immensely on the road to his article becoming
a Featured Article, possibly featured on Misplaced Pages's front page.

As well, we've found it difficult to obtain free images for most of the
other SNP politicians, and any other images would be helpful to us.

Slainte,
Canaen</blockquote>

] <b><span style="background-color: #008000"><font color="#ffffff">]</font></span></b> ] 04:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

== Electoral performance ==

There are some asterisked entries in the Electoral performance section, but no explanation of the footnote. (At least, I couldn't find one.) /] (]) 22:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

== 30th Sep Edits - Controversy section ==

On the 30th September, user 'Francis Tyers' removed the bulk of the existing controversy section. The section was renamed 'Criticisms' and then the sections about the Brian Souter donation removed on the grounds that they are "not really a criticism" (they are, of course, controversial - hence the original section title).

I believe that the Souter story is a valid addition to this article, as it was certainly widely covered in the press at the time, so I have created a new 'Controversy' section. Personally I believe 'Criticisms' and 'Controversy' should be merged, but I will leave them as they are just now.

] 09:35, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

The paragraphs on the Brian Souter donation keep getting removed. This is not useful editing. By all means add balance to a section, but don't simply delete (verified) information that you do not like.

For what it is worth, I am glad the SNP beat Labour this year - I am not trying to dirty their name, I only want to broaden the article to include all angles. I respect alot of the SNP policies, but I believe - as many do - that accepting the Souter donation was wrong. This information should be part of this article.

] 14:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Can someone help me out here? The Souter stuff taken down again, by someone using an anon IP address (can't guess who). I am losing faith in Misplaced Pages.

] 08:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

:Hi Templeton, if you look at the other party pages for Scotland, you will note that donations, even controversial ones, widely reported are not covered, for example the pornographer Richard Desmonds high profile donations to the Labour party, or Bernie Ecclestones large donations and ensuing controversy. Without these corresponding entries in the article on the Labour party, it is not reasonable to include controversial donations here. And personally I agree with you that accepting the donation was wrong. But that is a matter for our opinions, not this article. What might be considered is a section entitled "Donations" and then a breakdown of large donations and where they came from. I believe this information is publically available. - ] ] 10:26, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

::I've implemented a compromise, adding "High profile donators to the party include founder of ] ]." to the Party organisation section. We can add other high-profile donators if you can find some. The rest of the content is already covered on the ] page, which people may navigate to by means of a link. - ] ] 10:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 15:49, 24 November 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scottish National Party article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 6 months 
This article is written in Scottish English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, travelled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconScotland High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPolitics of the United Kingdom Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPolitics: Political parties High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. 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
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Political parties task force.
WikiProject iconSocialism Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archiving icon
Archives
Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Pro-Europeanism

Some clarity needs to be drawn here. Is this a question of "pro-Europeanism" or "pro-European Union". Political parties can be pro-European, and anti-EU. User:RoverTheBendInSussex (talk) 15:39, 21 September 2016 (GMT)

Why is their no moniker in the side-column at the top clearly indicating that the SNP is "pro-EU"/"Remain party"?

Political Ideology

There seems an extraordinary number of entries in the Info Box under Ideology, presently 8. The Infobox is for simple facts and not the place to be having this sort of almost discussion. For context check out any other major party in the UK they have 2 maybe three entries. Whereas many of the topics raised are very interesting they belong in the ideology section in the article and not cluttering up the infobox. I would propose to reduce these entries to 2 or 3 and the others transferred to ideology section. Tidies up infobox and allows for fuller discussion on topics of ideology for those that wish it. Soosider3 (talk) 12:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

IMO a workable streamlining would be to list Scottish nationalism, regionalism and social democracy, in that order, for three ideologies, and a two ideology solution would be simply Scottish nationalism and social democracy. (Scottish independence is a policy goal, not an ideology, and is basically redundant with Scottish nationalism.)-- Autospark (talk) 13:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I strongly support Scottish independence and Scottish nationalism remaining in the infobox. The rest in my view are subject to debate around moving into the main body. I think "big tent" could possibly be a good one to keep in the infobox, since the party has often generally been portrayed as a broad group united around the themes of Scottish nationalism and Scottish independence. In regards to social democracy stated above, the most recent source we have for this is coming up on 8-years-old in June, with the other sources for this claim years older than that, so it’s debatable whether that means it merits such a place of prominence as the infobox or its prominence in the opening of the article. Helper201 (talk) 17:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
This still holds true. I replaced a primary source with sources that call SNP social-democratic, from 2023 and 2021 respectively. Brat Forelli🦊 17:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, good work!— Autospark (talk) 17:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Cheers. Helper201 (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Well, isn’t “Scottish independence” a policy goal, not a distinct political ideology? Even if one considers it an ideology, it’s a component of Scottish nationalism. As for “big tent”, it’s still a predominantly centre-left party, and hasn’t altered its ideological stance in the last decade. One could just as equally state the Tory or Labour or LibDem parties are equally as much “big tents” as the SNP.— Autospark (talk) 17:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I'd argue Scottish independence is distinct from Scottish nationalism. The Scottish Greens for instance are pro-independence but make a distinction by explicitly not referring to what they represent as nationalism. I think it’s fair to say the SNP are generally centre-left, however, I think the breadth of opinion (i.e. elected SNP representatives with socially conservative views and the contrasting social views of the leadership candidates in the 2023 leadership election) in the SNP is greater than that which would be seen in other major parties like the Lib Dems. You'd be unlikely to find many socially conservative or socialist Liberal Democrats for instance. Yet my understanding is there are elected SNP representatives that span a range of political ideologs and positions, including socialist to conservative. This is in part demonstrated by the fact we have multiple sources referring to the party's big tent nature. Helper201 (talk) 17:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Literally the same could be said about Labour (and Plaid and the NI parties, etc), predominantly centre-left parties with groups and members with views to the right the general party position (which in the SNP’s case is to the left of Labour, if that matters). As for the Scottish Greens, this really isn’t the place for that discussion, but they might avoid the n-word for understandable reasons, but they’re still espousing Scottish nationalism.— Autospark (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Basically what I am trying to say, parties often have broad ranges of views, particularly parties of government. However, one would still refer to the Conservative party as centre-right, Labour as centre-left, etc, despite being “big tents” in themselves. With the SNP, I can’t agree with “big tent” alone as its political position, as that implies being a catch-all party spanning both left and right in equal measures, when it’s pretty much a typical European socdem party in many ways. The party hasn’t changed ideology in the last 8 or so years, and hasn’t significantly since the influence of the 79 Group.— Autospark (talk) 21:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
I think there may have been a misunderstanding here. I'm not saying that "big tent" should be its political position in the infobox. I agree with maintaining centre-left in that respect. I'm just saying "big tent" should probably be retained where it currently exists in the ideologies section of the infobox (with the retention of centre-left for the political position section). Though I'm more steadfast in the retention of Scottish nationalism and Scottish independence in the ideology section. Helper201 (talk) 22:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Do we have sources for "big tent", though? — Czello 07:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I would have just Scottish nationalism and social democracy—and nothing else. I am especially opposed to Scottish independence (not an ideology, but a political goal or policy), civic nationalism (meaning really little), left-wing populism (redundant and partially inaccurate), pro-Europeanism (again, not an ideology, but a political goal or policy) and big tent (not an ideology, not even a position). --Checco (talk) 06:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Additionally, I support only "centre-left" as political position—and "big tent" is not a political position. --Checco (talk) 06:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Well that seems to have generated some discussion, broadly (if I have followed the discussion correctly) there is broad agreement that Ideology in Infobox requires trimming, 2 or 3 entries seem to be floated as preferred.
We perhaps should also be looking at the number and quality of the references, many appear to have little if any relationship to the heading they are linked.
My tuppence worth
Almost all the reference should be removed, they add little (if anything) to the already existing internal Misplaced Pages popup, and in fact most are to Amazon pages where you can buy the book supposedly referenced - hardly supporting particular position.
RETAIN Civic Nationalism _ maintain this and remove references
REMOVE Scottish Independence - Policy aim not an ideology
RETAIN Social democracy - remove unhelpful references
REMOVE Scottish nationalism - already covered by Civic Nationalism
REMOVE Left-wing populism - not an ideology
REMOVE Regionalism - not an ideology
REMOVE Pro-Europeanism - Policy not Ideology
REMOVE Big tent - not an ideology Soosider3 (talk) 06:24, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Czello, there's three sources for "big tent" in the infobox. Helper201 (talk) 16:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I actually want to challenge the notion that these three sources really prove what they're supposed to prove. Namely that SNP is a "big tent" party in a way that other parties in the UK are not.
Let's start with the second source - The Scottish National Party Is Espousing A Multicultural Brand Of Nationalism by Joanna Kakissis on npr.org. What does it say? That "Unlike the anti-immigration, isolationist nationalist parties splintering the European Union, the Scottish National Party promotes a a "big tent" brand of nationalism." By this Kakissis means that SNP's nationalism positions itself "against England rather than against Europe, whereas English nationalism is defined against Europe." So the party promotes "big tent nationalism", but the party itself is not described as big tent.
Third source - Mr Scotland, chauvinism and the SNP’s big-tent nationalism by Jason Cowley, newstatesman.com. The reveal is in the title - "Mr Scotland, chauvinism and the SNP’s big-tent nationalism". Well, what is "big-tent nationalism"? One thing is certain - it is a radically different statement from "SNP is a big-tent party".
The first source - A Nation Changed? The SNP and Scotland Ten Years On by Gerry Hassan and Simon Barrow took some time to actually reach, since it's a book. But it does THE SAME THING - that rather than calling SNP "big-tent", it merely says that it has "big tent nationalism", by which it means that the nationalism of the party appeals to "every region, area and social group in Scotland". (p. 18). It also calls SNP social-democratic, stating that "the SNP has also achieved some success in defining its social democracy as more authentic than Labour’s under Blair and Brown." (p. 435).
As such, I want to say that this is WP:OR and does not actually prove what it is supposed to prove. Brat Forelli🦊 16:50, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
We seem to be starting to distil the issues here,
1 What is the InfoBox for? IMHO it is meant to provide quick headline information and really is not suitable for references that maybe more appropriate in the text about ideology.
2 What is Ideology - we seem to have broad agreement about what it is not, its not Policy. Its things like Civic Nationism and Social Democracy
It is good to see such a healthy discussion carried out in a reasoned, sensible and courteous manner (hope I haven't jinxed it) Soosider3 (talk) 19:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
All positive contributions in good faith, so no problems there.— Autospark (talk) 11:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

I think it’s important to remember that it’s possible to be nationalist without supporting independence, which is one of the reasons I support the inclusion of Scottish independence in the infobox. The two are not one and the same. Helper201 (talk) 21:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

What is Scottish nationalism in pursuit of? Nationhood, i.e. independence.— Autospark (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Nationalism isn't inherently like that, nor is nationalism always defined as the pursuit of a nation. It can simply be the promotion of the interests of a certain people or nation, not necessarily a pursuit of independence for said nation. This includes Scottish nationalism. Helper201 (talk) 07:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Surely, Scottish nationalism is the party's main ideology. I would have also social democracy, though, and nothing else. --Checco (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
There in is one of the concern I have about the use of language, "Nationalist" has many negative connotations more usually being used to describe "blood & soil" type movements, what ever you may think of the SNP is it most certainly not that. It is in part why I think Civil Nationalist is a more accurate description.
Think we may be moving to some broad agreement and believe we should seriously prune many of the entries under Ideology, 2 maybe 3 to me seem to sum up the salient points.
Social Democratic
Civic Nationalism
I could be persuaded re Independence, yes it is a policy but in this case it is also the prime reason for the party existing. Soosider3 (talk) 13:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
"Civic" or "civil nationalism" means little, while "Scottish nationalism" is precisely what the SNP stands for. --Checco (talk) 14:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
This. Social democracy and Scottish nationalism are the main ideologies of the party, and I can find more sources for both if needed.
I have no idea why we would do "civic nationalism", not to mention that I have a feeling it will be hard to find sources that explicitly call SNP that, meaning that we would use a rather obscure/rare descriptor of the SNP's ideology. And why? To me not only does this appear to be a vague term, but also an euphemism of sorts, amongst political circles where "nationalism" is a dirty word.
But the thing is, SNP is a Scottish nationalist party. It is not pejorative, nor is it positive. It is neutral, and simply a matter of fact. Brat Forelli🦊 18:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
"SNP is a Scottish nationalist party" you make my case for me by naming a non existing party, SNP is the Scottish National Party. See how easy that can happen, the correct ideology is Civic Nationalism Soosider3 (talk) 07:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
I was not naming a party. I was describing its ideology. This is the talk page of the Scottish National Party. Have you seen the opening sentence of the article?

The Scottish National Party (SNP; Scots: Scots National Pairty, Scottish Gaelic: Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta na h-Alba ) is a Scottish nationalist and social democratic political party.

That the main ideology of the SNP is Scottish nationalism can be easily confirmed by a plethora of sources. For the sake of simplicity, I will name one - The Modern SNP: From Protest to Power by Gerry Hassan, which states (page 5):

The SNP’s ‘doctrine’ is formally social democratic, while its ‘ethos’, the party’s sense of itself, is Scottish nationalist.

I have to admit, I see this as lack of reading comprehension. If I wanted to state the name of the party, I would say: "SNP is the Scottish National Party". I would capitalize all parts of the party name, and I would use "the" instead of "a". I am sure you know this.
I do not think your case for "civic nationalism" is clear. How many sources can you find that explicitly call SNP a civic nationalist party? Remember that we cannot do WP:OR. I do not see the case for this being the defining ideology of the SNP - that would be Scottish nationalism and social democracy instead.

References

  1. Hassan, Gerry (2009). The Modern SNP: From Protest to Power. Edinburgh University Press. p. 5. ISBN 978-0-7486-3991-5.

Brat Forelli🦊 10:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

"Scottish Nose Pickers" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Scottish Nose Pickers has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12 § Scottish Nose Pickers until a consensus is reached. Blethering Scot 15:43, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

"Scottish Nose-pickers" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Scottish Nose-pickers has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12 § Scottish Nose-pickers until a consensus is reached. Blethering Scot 15:44, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

"Scottish Nose-pickers" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Scottish Nose-pickers has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 12 § Scottish Nose-pickers until a consensus is reached. Blethering Scot 15:45, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

Categories: