Talk:Social liberalism

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 February 2019 and 3 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DaniloHelber.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The article, despite mentioning several non-Western social liberal parties and movements, revolves around its history in the West. Rupert Loup (talk) 07:06, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

In complete agreement to this. Moreover it deviates into American-specific definitions saying "in America..." but doesn't do that for any other country. I find it odd that the article is very American-focused. America should probably have it's own section instead, with more citations. Since I find the citations for this artical very lacking 92.7.176.44 (talk) 21:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

Summarize Timeline Top Qs Fact Check

The "Flag representing social liberalism" (see also: right, above) I posted earlier is my redesign (vectorized, squared and Latin logotype), but this is not my original.

The original is this file (see also: right, below) uploaded by Mr./Ms. Vichotille (talk · contribs).

And perhaps the most original source is on this (below) site.

• u / vichotille (2021-02-04). "With a group of Social Liberals we made this flags for the movement. Hope you like it!!!". Reddit. Retrieved 2021-10-02.

It says: "With a group of 40 Social liberals we made this flag for the movement."

This is also almost certainly a post by Vichotille (talk · contribs). Looking at the profile on this site, he or she seems to live in Curacaví, Chile.

And it seems that various kinds ofgoods such as T-shirts using this design are being manufactured and sold.

• ""Social liberalism flag symbol" T-shirt by camisariasj". Redbubble. Retrieved 2021-10-02.

The flag is described at Wikimedia Commons as: "This flag represents social liberalism around the world."

At first, I believed this explanation, and the goods were on sale, I thought the flag was some kind of official or widely used symbol of social liberalism. However, it turns out that it was actually designed and published just a few months ago by a group of only 40 Chilean social liberals.

So I ask everyone for your opinions:

1. Post it again with the annotation: "This flag is an unofficial and unapproved symbol, recently designed by few Chilean groups of social liberals as represents social liberalism world wide."
2. Not post again.

I would appreciate your feedback.--Obendorf (talk) 04:50, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for inviting comment. WP:Self-published applies to flags as much as text so please not post again unless and until multiple wp:reliable sources give it recognition. For the record, Reddit is not a reliable source. (Anybody can upload any image to Commons and call it what they like. The file name has no status.)--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:47, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Mr. John Maynard Friedman: Thank you for your reply.
I repeat, this flag is not my original, therefore, it may not applicable to "Self-published". I "just" re-edited the existing flag.
At least, it is probably true that this flag is used by some people of social liberals. And at present, there is no other worldwide symbol that represents social liberalism. Therefore, this is a valuable symbol of the social liberalism.
If you don't mind, please see my tentative post, then try removing "<!--" and previewing. That is one of my suggestions.--Obendorf (talk)

I don't believe I suggested that it was your own work, rather that it is the creators' self-published work. The fact that it is original is not significant, the issue is that it has no widespread recognition in secondary sources. Wikipedia follows, not leads. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 08:17, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Conclusion: Thank you for your polite teaching. "Wikipedia follows, not leads", yes, I understood. I reserve this flag as a temporary hidden link. I will not be involved in this flag from now on. If someday the flag is picked up by other media and becomes widely recognized, I would appreciate to remove the "comment out <!-- -->" and publish it. I apologize for causing you trouble. I pray for the development of this page.--Obendorf (talk) 21:57, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

No need whatever to apologise. This is exactly how Wikipedia editing is supposed to work. Your question was a very reasonable one and I am just another editor like you, I just happen to have been editing for many years and have come across this sort of thing before. Again, thank you for having invited comment at the article talk page before making a potentially controversial change. You could of course have been bold and just done it, provided you accept the risk that another editor might have reverted, invoking bold, revert, discuss. That is also how Wikipedia is supposed to work.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

He's well known as a classical liberal which this article attempts to set up as a contrasting ideology. Overall it feels like this article and the classical liberal articles are running into a problem with vicious abstraction. 136.49.230.174 (talk) 06:44, 6 August 2024 (UTC)