Talk:United National Movement/Archive 1

Archive 1

It's a far right political party

According to how this party treats the national minorities, it seems that the UNM is a far right political party. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.190.194.119 (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

this is flag of georgia

this flag is not party flag, it is flag of a country, flag of georgia. unm has no flag. they were using this flag before 2004. after rose revolution this flag became state flag. party and country can not have same flag. therefore i have removed this flag from article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.252.247 (talk) 18:53, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Merge

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the "National Movement" is the same party. Charles Essie (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I think the other page should be deleted rather than merged though. Westchestiditor (talk) 12:20, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Dissolved?

The infobox states that this party is dissolved and I recently made several changes to this article reflect that. These changes have since been reversed but the infobox still states that the party is dissolved. I was under the impression that the UNM split into the Movement for Liberty - European Georgia and the National Movement. Does anyone know what's going on here? Charles Essie (talk) 16:52, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

European Georgia split from the UNM whereas previously it was merely a parallel structure which had always participated in elections under European Georgia’s coalitions but never considered apart from the UNM. To say that the UNM is now just NM makes no sense as I see it because the coalitions which converged to make the UNM united are no longer involved. Westchestiditor (talk) 12:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Sources needed; relation with UNM needed

Apart from a general need of sources, parts of this article such as #2004–2007: Centralization, reforms, strong executive cover the general achievements of Georgian government, broadly construed (president + parliament) without saying in what way this relates to the UNM. With all the party name changes (from National Movement to/from United National Movement?) and various short-term or long-term coalitions, this has to be clarified for ordinary readers who are not going to be able to remember all the various details of the full article.

I've currently marked this section with an {{offtopic}} tag, which of course can be removed if the relation with UNM is properly clarified. To what degree was Saakashvili representing the UNM or working with the UNM during this period? Currently the #Founding section of the article says that Saakashvili created the NM, not the UNM. Even if Saakashvili created the UNM and the UNM + other parties supported his presidential campaign, that doesn't say in what way the 2004–2007 executive and legislative actions related to UNM. Were ministers acting purely on behalf of the UNM party? Were they consulting various groups in Georgian society more broadly?

Please fix this with proper sourcing if you can help. Boud (talk) 17:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Article move

This article should be moved to "United National Movement", with the current "United National Movement" being moved to "United National Movement (disambiguation)" page.

This UNM is clearly the largest, most significant and the only relevant one. It is additionally the only UNM which either has parliamentary representation or is not defunct. Large political party's such as Law and Justice have pages without stipulating the country as is is clearly the largest L&J party despite others existing in the world. UNM article should follow a similar example. Zlad! (talk) 15:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Ideology

I support only having Liberal Conservatism and Pro-Europeanism in the infobox. Maybe Atlanticism as well. All other descriptors are valid to use in the ideology section down, but let's not get carried away with listing Liberal Autocracy and goofy things like that in the infobox.

I also think the UNM's autocratic tendencies while in government should be highlighted in the lead and this article needs a giant reworking as a whole, but listing Liberal Autocracy in the infobox is pure absurdity. Zlad! (talk) 20:10, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Why is it "goofy"? Why should not it be mentioned? WP:JDL. The information is sourced. Neither liberal conservatism nor pro-Europeanism includes liberal autocracy per se, support for autocracy is important element of party's ideology. Nivzaq (talk) 20:12, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Because its obvious anti-UNM propaganda. Not to say there isn't a place for anti-UNM propaganda on this article, there definitely is, but putting "liberal autocracy" in the infobox is very transparent of you. I can be petty and just put Russophilia, Authoritarianism, Autocracy, and so on in the ideology section of the GD infobox as well. Zlad! (talk) 20:17, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

"its obvious anti-UNM propaganda". Which one is? The cited sources are reliable and are not "anti-UNM propaganda" but just stating the fact. Which one of the sources is propaganda?

"I can be petty and just put Russophilia, Authoritarianism, Autocracy, and so on in the ideology section of the GD infobox as well"

"GD" page is irrelevant here and such false equivalences can not be used as argument in any way. Nivzaq (talk) 20:22, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Dude come on. I'm making a comparison to make you realize how petty you are acting. Just write a neutral article. Zlad! (talk) 20:31, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Ok, whatever. I won't restore the information to the infobox. Nivzaq (talk) 20:32, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I'm planning to tackle UNM's article sometime in the future (can't promise anything) and I would appreciate if you would provide your POV to the article as well or if you would take the initiative of editing it. This article is in a dire state and needs serious work. Zlad! (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Sadly, just once again really poor writing and really bad POV edits. I'm not mad, I'm disappointed. Zlad! (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2024 (UTC)