Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Storm Alliance

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. Enigma^msg 20:26, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Storm Alliance

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

A directory-like listing on a minor far-right group. Does not meet WP:NORG and significant RS coverage not found. The group has participated in local demonstrations and has garnered some local coverage, but that's about it. WP:TOOSOON per review of available sources which are insufficient to build an NPOV article. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:02, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I say Keep the page. the page still needs more work. Leftwinguy92 (talk) 06:13, 22 May 2018 (UTC)(User:Leftwinguy92, it is customary to mention that you are the creator of a page; just so you you know, I can see that you are newish here. It takes a while to learn the ropes.)E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 08:46, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There may be enough coverage to keep this poorly-sourced article about a new, far right political group. Here in the National Post : How the violent Charlottesville rally unmasked key players in Montreal's alt-right. Here: Montreal neo-Nazi, outed this week, was lead cheerleader for deadly U.S. cell on the CBC. However, since the coverage is about a small group now identified as led by a man affiliated with the The Daily Stormer, it may make sense to MERGE it to the The Daily Stormer.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:27, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I say Keep the Page for a while. the group is becoming more and more and more prominent with more News of them by the international media and the Canadian media. Leftwinguy92 (talk) 01:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nom's comment: "minor far-right group" articles are more trouble than their worth. I'd say give it a year or so; if it becomes more notable, then sure. For now, it's WP:TOOSOON. Note that the article consists almost entirely of a "mission statement" apparently lifted from the group's Facebook page. That's where this information belongs, not here. So I don't see anything worth merging either. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:18, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, maybe Speedy Delete - Leftwinguy92, who also created the page, looks to have been blocked as a sockpuppet of a banned user. As such I've struck the comments above. This would qualify the article for WP:G5 except that another user made nonminor edits (arguable, since the result is a net negative, just copying in the organization's mission statement (?)). Also possible is WP:A7 as there's no claim of significance here. Yet another CSD option is WP:G11, given it's an article comprising a few most basic words and a big mission statement paragraph. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:51, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - nothing in the article indicates notability, and the article's creator is a banned sockpuppet. PK T(alk) 13:18, 27 May 2018 (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.