Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Policies of the British National Party

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.

Strong delete There was no real discussion or consensus for this fork, and it causes major POV problems. It leaves the main article without much from the BNP about themselves, and the fork itself is little more than BNP propaganda without any rebuttal from secondary sources. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 22:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. None of the aformenetioned commeents give a reason for the deletion. The lack of concensus and the lack of NPOV aren't reasons for deletion. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 22:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. True, we could just blank it and redirect back to the BNP article. Rockpocket 23:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - This page is just a soap box for a political party, which is againt Wikipedia policies. Spylab (talk) 23:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect (and merge as needed) to British National Party#Policies. This is a reasonable search term, and deleting this outright could lead to reader confusion or re-creation of an even more POV article. Deleting this page does not allow the information to be incorporated back into the article, as was brought up by Hackney. Alone the article is certainly soapboxy, however incorporated into the article, where there is possibility for discussion of other POV's, these policy summaries can provide useful information. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The information hasn't been removed from the article, it's still there. First ClueBot, then various other editors misunderstood the intentions of the edit as he didn't use edit summaries when removing it. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete The page was created by a now-banned user as part of a campaign against myself and others, which included him making several reverts, acting entirely without consensus (or reason), threatening users, vandalising user pages. It was made simply by abstracting a section from BNP, which was totally unnecessary, and one must suspect NPOV issues were involved. The entirety of the article as created is still part of the BNP page and provided there within context. The banned user has a history of this. There is no need for this page to exist. Emeraude (talk) 12:21, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Liar and cheater Emeraude says I vandalise user pages, when he vandalised mine and never responded to my initially polite comments. Trickster and con-man One Night In Hackney has done the same thing. The BNP accepts practising Jewish members and is staunchly pro-Israel if you read their news articles. But then again, these guys are liars, and ignore what they don't like. I won't be surprised if this truthful comment is deleted.Qwenton (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Response "Truthful comment"? (1) You did vandalise pages and were warned for it (and subsequently banned for harassing users). (2) I did respond to your comment, (3) which was intially NOT made to me, when I edited the BNP article, (4) by pointing out that the article does say that the BNP has Jewish members. (See Revision history of British National Party: "22:05, 3 March 2008(Article states there are Jewish members! Party's view as stated here has been referenced.)".) None of this has anything to do with the present AfD. You will be surprised that your comment is not deleted. I think it and your attacks on users' pages say more about your attitude than I ever could. Emeraude (talk) 11:55, 6 March 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.