Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Labour Party of America

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. MBisanz ^talk 05:00, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Labour Party of America

This appears to be a hoax. A U.S. party wouldn't use the spelling 'Labour', and the free-hosting website doesn't seem to be that of an actual existing party. Soman (talk) 19:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — I'm with the nominator on this one. Sounds very much like a hoax. The 'fact' it was established this October isn't particularly convincing either. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs · email) 19:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to Socialist Labor Party of America - Even if its not a hoax, it fails notability guidelines; created a month ago and no independent coverage I could find. As for whether to delete it or redirect it as I suggested, it doesn't matter that much to me, but just a thought...it might not be a bad idea to redirect someone who may be using British English to find information on a Labor Party of America to something that falls along those lines. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 19:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect - as stated above BritishWatcher (talk) 19:27, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Not a hoax, I cannot find any verifiable secondary sources establishing the needed notability for inclusion. Also note a clear conflict of interest with the article's creator; I also suspect possible spamming as a result (i.e. Wikipedia is not the place to primarily let people know about a new party that you created yourself; that must be established outside of Wikipedia first). MuZemike (talk) 21:37, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This group, even if real, is in no way related to the Socialist Labor Party, and that would be a inappropriate redirect. Personally, I doubt its reality altogether. The use of the spelling, incidentally, would be possible in any actual organization that might date from the 19th century,or might be deliberately used as a distinctive name, and does not determine it as a hoax. DGG (talk) 02:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I can't find evidence this party ever existed + Soman makes a very good point for "Labour". The fact that the image linked in the article uses British accent it's a strong sign that we are dealing with a hoax here. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:04, 24 November 2008 (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.