Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Liberal Part

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. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Liberal Part

[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)

This is the nth page created on a non-existent object, "La Parte Liberale del Popolo della Libertà" was simply the name of a conference held by Benedetto Della Vedova (see [1]), so this "faction" (so it has been described) never existed. I already know that the user who created this page will intervene to affirm that it was a relevant Italian faction, but that's a pity that its existence and its possible relevance will not be demonstrated. It is clear that the user has taken the name of a simple conference and on this page has made it a faction of a political party. And I believe it would be a pity if a page based on a completely false assumption was maintained due to the opposition of one or two allied users who don't give explanations... Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:30, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No matter how small or short-lived, each and every party faction deserves an article. This is particularly interesting. --Checco (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Checco: Here too the same reasoning as for the Liberal-Popular Union is valid, you should prove that a faction with this name existed; the sources claim that "The Liberal Part" was the simple name of a conference held by Benedetto Della Vedova (it would be enough to read the sources). I found only two sources that refer to this "Liberal Part", and these two sources claim that it was only the name of a conference. A conference and a faction are two different things. And frankly I don't see anything particularly interesting or relevant on a page that merely lists its members (and the link of the source about the members is not even more active).--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately also this time the user did not answer my question, it does not seem to me sufficient to say that the page must be kept because it is interesting, when the same user is not able to demonstrate the existence of a faction with this name or its encyclopedic relevance. In this page I only see the name of a conference turned into a faction and a list of members without sources...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is not even about a party; it's about a (small) conference trying to be a (small) faction within a (small) party, said conference-cum-faction being of a very brief life and leaving behind practically no grounds for notability. It fails WP:GROUP. Incidentally, we should get going with the WP:NPOL proposal. Nothing of legitimate interest here. -The Gnome (talk) 18:23, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per User:The Gnome; indeed, not actually its own party. "Conference-cum-faction" is incredibly witty by the way, bravo. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 22:19, 15 May 2020 (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.