Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/9th International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties. Selectively. Sandstein 08:08, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

9th International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am also including in this nomination:

These appear to fail Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Inclusion criteria. All of the cited coverage appears to be either self-published or routine. There does not seem to be an indication that these individual instances have had a lasting effect, nor that they meet the general notability guideline. Furthermore, they offer the reader nothing other than further data, something Wikipedia is not for than the key information at the main article. The formula is: copy the key dates, theme and attendees from the website. It appears to be an indiscriminate collection of data, something Wikipedia isn't for. SITH (talk) 15:39, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the articles largely need to be expanded to provide more detail about what happened at these individual meetings, I think it may be premature to delete these articles. The meetings are significant as they are the ICMWP is the largest (and perhaps only) international organization of Communist Parties throughout the world. The meetings themselves are mentioned in numerous secondary and primary sources online (specifically Greek, Chinese, and Portuguese publications). "Furthermore, they offer the reader nothing other than further data, something Wikipedia is not for than the key information at the main article." I don't disagree that there is a formula for creating these articles, at present I am the only one who is working on this project so I simply have not had the time to expand the articles to include more relevant information. Jp16103 15:48, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:19, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:19, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/redirect International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties already lists the national organizations and their attendance at the meetings. The meeting articles provide nothing more than this and do not demonstrate individual notability. Reywas92^Talk 19:18, 1 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:RAPID also says "Don't rush to delete...." Jp16103 has a point that there are sources in languages other than English, to which she or he may have access. JSTOR lists 33 search results of English language articles that mention the IMOCWP, tho none devoted to it exclusively: here. Judging from the mentions, the meetings are more important outside the English speaking world.ch (talk) 03:39, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To get a better consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rollidan (talk) 18:49, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the table to List of communist parties and delete all these pages or keep only the latest one. The meaningful information in the Table is column "Parliamentary representation" because it shows influence of these parties in various countries. My very best wishes (talk) 21:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect. The articles have no individual notability.--Darwinek (talk) 01:17, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Merge The controlling policy is WP:NEVENT. There needs to be diverse, in-depth, and persistent coverage. These do not have this as searches show. Collectively however, they do belong in a list of these events somewhere. No prejudice against spinning out later if foreign language sources are found that satisfy the criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2000:8FC0:4:617F:E9A7:AF1C:4546 (talk) 02:58, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.