Talk:Republican Party (United States): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Tom Morris
mNo edit summary
imported>Russell D. Jones
(→‎Naming: hrrrmmph)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 6: Line 6:


In two weeks time, on the 21 Feburary 2010, I shall move this page (if it hasn't already been moved) unless significant objections to moving it have been raised. –[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] 12:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
In two weeks time, on the 21 Feburary 2010, I shall move this page (if it hasn't already been moved) unless significant objections to moving it have been raised. –[[User:Tom Morris|Tom Morris]] 12:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
==Ridiculousness==
Aside from other ironies (along the lines of government-sponsored laisez faire economic policies), doesn't anyone see the ridiculousness of a heading titled "future trends?"  [[User:Russell D. Jones|Russell D. Jones]] 00:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:42, 28 January 2011

This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition One of two major contemporary political parties in the United States; center-right; the elephant is its symbol. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories History and Politics [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

Naming

The Republican Party is not actually called the "U.S. Republican Party". It's called the "Republican Party". I think the page should be called "Republican Party (United States)", just like we have "Java (programming language)" rather than "Java programming language" (because Java is a programming language, not a language called "Java programming language").

In two weeks time, on the 21 Feburary 2010, I shall move this page (if it hasn't already been moved) unless significant objections to moving it have been raised. –Tom Morris 12:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Ridiculousness

Aside from other ironies (along the lines of government-sponsored laisez faire economic policies), doesn't anyone see the ridiculousness of a heading titled "future trends?" Russell D. Jones 00:42, 29 January 2011 (UTC)