Talk:Reformist Movement

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mouvement Réformateur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.parties-and-elections.eu/begium.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928025708/http://www.mr.be/PDF/Statuts-MR.pdf to http://www.mr.be/PDF/Statuts-MR.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Social liberalism

Multipe sources (https://www.lalibre.be/belgique/politique-belge/2019/03/19/des-liberaux-veulent-creer-un-courant-progressiste-au-mr-avec-christine-defraigne-a-leur-tete-2ML6ARLUEJE5VJANQW2F55ZPTM/ and https://www.lesoir.be/262769/article/2019-11-26/rlp-le-nouveau-rassemblement-des-liberaux-progressistes-au-sein-du-mr) seem to say that MR has at least a small social-liberal wing. It obviously isn't the majority, but perhaps we can add it under "Factions" while keeping "liberalism" as the main ideology? Also we have "liberalism" and "conservative liberalism" which would indicate a mainstream centre to centre right view with centre to centre-left factions. PtolemyXV (talk) 17:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

may i ask why Open Vld is just conservative liberal?

@The Hammering Hammer: Braganza (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Jean-Luc Crucke a main social liberal leader left the party. I don't see social liberalism as a main ideology. Currently MR is also the main right-wing party in Walloon politics. Braganza (talk) 16:26, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

So should social liberalism be added under "factions" or "minority" or something like that? GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 23:37, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

It shouldn’t be listed anywhere. As Braganza mentions, the MR is the main centre-right party in francophone Belgium. I would list just “conservative liberalism” in the Infobox.— Autospark (talk) 12:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

tbf i would prefer Liberalism (Belgium) & Conservative Liberalism just because of the existence of this article (Liberalism in Belgium) Braganza (talk) 17:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

@GlowstoneUnknown: social liberalism is already mentioned in the "Ideology and policies" section Braganza (talk) 17:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

So would anybody be against removing social liberalism entirely from the ideology tab? GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

I would wait 24hrs and then remove it Braganza (talk) 07:43, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Will do. GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 08:55, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

The party could be described simply with "liberalism" in the infobox. While "conservative liberalism" makes sense, "social liberalism" does not. Surely, several parties have socially-liberal attitudes on some issues, but that does not mean that they are social-liberal per se. --Checco (talk) 06:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Alright, unless there's any objections, I'll remove social liberalism from the ideology. It seems like the consensus is that it's an inaccurate descriptor for the party. GlowstoneUnknown (talk) 08:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)