Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Revolutionary Communists 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 Draftify‎. as an ATD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Revolutionary Communists of America[edit]

[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)

General lack of notability. Out of ten sources present six are self-published (mostly historical and describing various rebrandings) and the other four are from fringe publications that don't really pass a reliability sniff test, with two belonging to Campus Reform (a publication belonging to a right-wing/libertarian think-tank) and the other two being left-wing blog sites that seemingly belong to fringe left-wing political parties/groups that oppose IMT. Doesn't look to be any justification based on notable coverage of the group. Rambling Rambler (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics. Rambling Rambler (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacking "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" required per WP:ORGCRITE. Current sourcing is pretty terrible and there's not much evidence of anything better available. AusLondonder (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. As the article creator, I agree its sourcing is weak. Aside from notability, I just want to note that the article is useful: It helps differentiate the Judean Pe -- sorry, the Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (Maoist-ish) and the Revolutionary Communists of America (Trotskyist-ish), which are often confused.

Beyond the sources in the article, I could only find these:

* Local news about local event, no real details https://web.archive.org/web/20160421173142/http://www.startribune.com/powderhorn-park-oratory-draws-minneapolis-left/265855511

* College news about "Are You A Communist" pamphlets, zero details https://mnrepublic.com/9491/news/a-shocking-proliferation-of-communist-propaganda-on-campus/

* College news about the US IMT, fairly detailed, also about "Are You A Communist" https://mndaily.com/278982/opinion/opinion-are-you-a-communist-then-fork-over-65/

* Critical article about IMT and trans issues, fairly detailed, from a Trotskyist competitor group (but fairly sane and with high-quality writing) https://www.leftvoice.org/trans-liberation-and-socialist-revolution-a-debate-with-the-imt/

* Critical article about IMT and January 6, some detail, from a Trotskyist competitor group https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/02/01/imtc-f01.html

* Critical letter about IMT, some detail, from a Trotskyist competitor group https://internationalsocialist.net/en/2010/03/theory

* Definitely not RS, but useful history about IMT / SR https://splitsandfusions.wordpress.com/2023/08/05/are-you-or-have-you-ever-been/

I think the MN Daily article and Left Voice articles might be enough to eke out notability? If not, can the article be draftified? SocDoneLeft (talk) 05:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've really just highlighted the problem further and why I put it for deletion. Most of the coverage you're demonstrating is about the IMT as a whole, and mostly from other minor groups in the circular firing squad that is Trotyskyist political organisations. There's nothing really here to denote notability of the group itself, certainly nothing in the sort of perennial reliable sources you'd expect to demonstrate notability of a political group. Rambling Rambler (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the purpose of deleting this ? Right now it seems to me to suppress this group and take away their notability and credibility. But this is not productive or helpful in creating a decent society for all people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:449:4300:A760:B050:2685:35BB:4CBF (talk) 13:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Response - Wikipedia is not intended to be a promotional platform and does not give or take away notability. If a subject is inherently notable then the page should remain, if it is not notable - as judged laregely by whether or not there are reliable, independent sources, then the article should be deleted. Wellington Bay (talk) 13:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Notability hasn't been established. Most of the sources are from RCP/Socialist Revolution/IMT websites while other sources are marginal and not considered reliable sources. Wellington Bay (talk) 14:44, 11 March 2024 (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.