Talk:Liberal State Party

More info.

for more information see Talk:Liberalism worldwide#Liberal political party C mon 10:34, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I am Dutch: Liberale Staatspartij means Liberal State Party, Polical would be in Dutch Politiek or Politieke. An alternative translation is Staatkundig(e).Political Party is not a correct translation. Staatkundig in SGP should be translated with Political, not Staats-. Compare the German State Party. I did a quick search on google, there are only a few sources, but Liberal Political Party is not used. Rulers and worldstatesmen use Liberal State Party. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 17:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

A Google search in for "Liberale Staatspartij" in English pages [1] reveals that (outside of Wikipedia-derived sources) it is most often translated as "Liberal State Party", although I do see one example of "Liberal National Party". I have to admit I was confused by how "Staats-" could be "Political", but "Staatkundig" gives me a little insight. I'm (mis?)understanding "Staatkundig" as "skilled in state matters" or "active in state" and I see how that translates to "political". But that still suggests to me that "Staatspartij" translates to "party of state" or "state party". I don't feel confident enough to say for certain, though with the Google search and my own tortured etymology, I'm leaning Liberal State Party. -- Coelacan | talk 19:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

But anyway, since I didn't heed WP:RM and get your attention ahead of time, C Mon (sorry!), I volunteer to do the move and handle the redirects and the rewording of the various articles if Liberal Political Party (the Netherlands) is ultimately chosen. :) -- Coelacan | talk 20:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

It is very difficult to find a right translation for "liberale staatspartij" if only because the party itself did not exist in a time when English translations mattered. I'm taking my lead from the SGP (staatskundig gereformeerde partij) which according to their own website should be translated as "Reformed Political Party". Analogously Liberale Staatspartij can best be translated as "Liberal Political Party", the "Staats" in LSP was put there to differentiate from conventional parties, which only represented factions of the population (the protestant or the social-democratic interest), the Staatspartij was supposed to look out for the common interest. Political Party conveys this idea best in English. -- C mon 23:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

So the "Staats" was meant to indicate that the party wished to represent the common interest of everyone in the nation? As opposed to factions, that is. -- Coelacan | talk 22:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

I completely disagree. Staatkundig is nmot the same as staats. Staatkundig in Dutch is a synomym of politiek, so the translation used for Staatkundig as Political is correct. But Staatkundig en Staats- are not the same. See again the German State Party. It might be interesting to learn the explanation of the party of its name. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 21:45, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

We'll have to wait until I can get to a library (tomorrow being the Ascension-day) to see what Koole (the authoritative source) has written on the name, if I remember correctly, what I've written above would cover it. BTW staatskundig and staats- mean the same thing. Staatskundig being the adjective and staats- the suffix meaning "in relation to the state".

There is thirdway out: the LSP had two different names it used somewhat interchangeably the other being Vrijheidsbond (Freedom League). Perhaps we could settle on that? -- C mon 23:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed Staats means "in relation to the state", staatkundig means knowledge of the state, or the ability of governing the state, or an old name for political. There has to be a good reason not to use the literal translation, e.g. when another translation is nusually used. That is not the case here. I'm sorry.

Vrijheidsbond was the original name, but around 1928 the name was changed into Liberale Staatspartij De Vrijheidsbond en some time later only Liberale Staatspartij was used. Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 22:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing the history of the name out, but we could have already read that in the article.

I still think Liberal Political Party fits the WP:NAME better:

Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.

Liberal Political Party is very clear and unambiguous in convey that the LSP was a liberal party, that was not factionalist, while Liberal State Party may have a quaint feeling and be a literal translation, but Wikipedia policy says nothing about that.

But more importantly, what do you think about the compromise: Freedom League, the original name of the party? -- C mon 24:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Liberal Political Party is too close to Liberal Party. But I like the idea of the Freedom League because it is the original name. That leaves open still the question what to do with the Roomsch-Katholieke Staatspartij and the Hervormd-Gereformeerde Staatspartij. Intangible 01:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, first, C Mon, please verify for me if I understand correctly: the "Staats" in "Staatspartiej" was meant to indicate that the party wished to represent the common interest of everyone in the nation?

Second, problems with Freedom League:

1. This name does not resolve the question, it just moves the question from article title to article body. A "Freedom League" article will have to say at some point, either "after 1937 it adopted the name Liberal State Party" or "after 1937 it adopted the name Liberal Political Party". We still have to decide which is better, and whichever is appropriate for article body might as well be the article title.
2. It's odd to name an article after a party's original name, rather than its most recent name, although the article body should include both. See the Plaid Cymru article for instance. It could be titled "Plaid Genedlaethol Cymru" (the original name) or even "Byddin Ymreolwyr Cymru" (a predecessor party that joined up into Plaid Cymru in the beginning). But these names would be confusing, even if they weren't Welsh. The most recent name is the name that will be most often referenced by modern non-Wikipedia sources.

-- Coelacan | talk 02:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

To the Coelan's first point, to my knowledge, yes, Staatspartij was meant to indicate an orientation towards the common interest.

To your second point(s),

1. wikipedia policy isn't clear on this, so we can do whatever we want to, including make a compromise;
2. the LSP wasn't that clear on its own name, I don't know whether the party changed its name legally and the party constitution, or just marketed its self under a new name (like New Labour);
3. the LSP is differentiated from its predecessor (the Liberal Union) and its successor (the the Freedom Party) by the use of different pages, so part of your argument on Plaid Cymru holds no ground;

To Intangible. Yes we have a problem with RKSP and HGSP, since we are not moving closer her, maybe we should seek a larger audience like a request for comment or wait until I finally have gotten my hands on Koole.

-- C mon 19:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

But still there is no good reason not to use the literal translation. There is no other translation normally used in English. BTW Chris COok and John Paxton use in European Political Facts 1900-1996 the translation for RKSP Catholic State Party. Are there any sources using Liberal Political Party? Electionworld = Wilfried (talk 17:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to look the origin/right translation of the name up, but it does not appear to a subject of tremendous importance to anyone but me. Although I remain of the opinion that Liberal Political Party is a better translation (seeing that the LSP wanted nothing to do with partisan strife and pillarized society, see Koole 1995), and would prefer Vrijheidsbond/Freedom League as name, since it the name the party had for the longest period (1918-1928 vs 1937-1946), but it is clear that there is little support for such a move. For now, the article can retain her current name. C mon 08:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)