Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National-Anarchism

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 keep, and I'll examine the conduct of whoever added the {{db-nonsense}} tag. Sandstein 18:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

National-Anarchism[edit]

(Also page National anarchism.) Was tagged {{db-nonsense}}, but as this page has had text since January 2008 it better be discussed. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 04:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep The article clearly does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, and as I understand it, there is no actual rationale for deletion beyond its being tagged. Calgary (talk) 14:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Article is well sourced and not nonsense as far as I can tell. No rationale for deletion other than it was a declined speedy. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Chirps•Clams•Chowder)} 17:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep I've worked on heavily on referencing the article, and I've seen no rationale for deletion so far. Belzub (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep Of course the article is full of nonsense, but how else could it reflect this wretched ideology. That's precisely why it should be kept.Harrypotter (talk) 17:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete C'mon now, these sources are absolute rubbish. Web forums, white power websites, commie agitprop, radical rag-sheets, and unattributed political screeds. Fails WP:GNG, WP:NOBJ, and WP:RS. Nothing here that can't be neatly summed up at Anarchism and nationalism. Cheers. L0b0t (talk) 21:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article on the inventor of this "ideology" Troy Southgate should be deleted for the same reasons, sourcing is just not up to snuff. L0b0t (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep L0b0t obviously hates any ideology not his own. Both National-Anarchism and Troy Southgate are works are significant developments in a number of different areas. This is like a Democrat saying the Republican page should be deleted because he doesn't like what it says. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.191.150.21 (talk) 02:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please WP:AGF, you have no idea what "ideology" I do or do not like. The issue here is sources or rather, lack thereof. On its face, this article fails our general notability guideline, notability and objectivity guideline, and guideline for reliable sources. Please address your comments to these conserns, not your misguided assumptions about other editors. Cheers. L0b0t (talk) 10:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and close Satisfies notability concerns as the subject of non-trivial third party coverage in notable sources , cf Green Anarchy". Plenty of sourced material available to verify content such that a reasonably comprehensive article can be written within the bounds of neutrality. Nomination of a long-standing article (as "nonsense" to boot) without any serious attempt at addressing issues through editing or discussing first is disruptive and indicative of trolling. Skomorokh 17:28, 23 July 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.