Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dissident Congress / Populist Party (UK)

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 delete. NW (Talk) 20:25, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dissident Congress / Populist Party (UK)

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

No notability asserted. Registration with the Electoral Commission is not a sufficient qualification, nor is a 'passing reference' by Searchlight. No website and blog no longer updated. Ran for election once and failed miserable. Bastin 10:58, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Delete. Not notable; extremely minor political party and most of the article discusses its founders' previous political activities. Sam Blacketer (talk) 11:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Never heard of it before today. The populist party gained 60 in a local election in 98, and has not been hear from since. Has no notability whatsoever in the wikipedia sense. Also, no reason was given when the PROD was removed. Martin451 (talk) 22:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Coverage is trivial. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 08:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A glance through the history of the article appears to show that a member or supporter of the Populist Party stole the Wikipedia page from another organisation called Dissident Congress which has a website and a completely different postal address. The Populist Party appears to be totally insignificant and irrelevant. It has no website, no presence or mention elsewhere on the internet, no presence in the real world, no nothing. I recommend that this article is deleted and a new article created for the Dissident Congress that this article originally represented.
Delete. How many times do we have to delete articles about this non-notable party? See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Populist Party (UK) and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Populist Party (UK political party). We also definitely shouldn't have an article on the Dissident Congress. These are tiny parts of the nationalist right, barely even mentioned on the blogosphere and given no attention in reliable sources. Fences&Windows 23:03, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Certainly non-notable; most people in the area where it is said to exist have not even heaed of it, let alone anybody else. Absolutely no independent sources. Seems like a vanity page. RolandR 18:39, 1 December 2009 (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.