Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British National Party
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was Speedy keep under guidelines. Capitalistroadster 01:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
British National Party[edit]
The reason why racist, neo-Nazi parties like BNP have been so prominent recently is precisely because of pages like this allowing them to air their fascist propaganda. All content on this page must be removed immediately - all publicity is good publicity in the eyes of these Nazis, in order to reduce exposure to their sickening activities. They are a tiny, non-notable party who do not have a single Member of Parliament, but it is important that they are squashed before they rise - the German Nazi party only had 2.6% of the vote in 1939, after all. Desmond22 00:39, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep -- As long as the information is presented in an NPOV sort of way, you not agreeing with the subject's views is no reason to delete a page. If it were, the George W. Bush page would have been deleted a long time ago. Mr. Lefty Talk to me! 00:42, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep bad faith nomination. Metros232 00:44, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Obvious keep Party is notable in view of its electoral performances and in view of the publicity generated by sundry party activities. Nominator would do well to read WP:NOT and WP:DEL (I'm assuming good faith and not also listing WP:POINT [after an unrefuted imputation of WP:POINT violation, a speedy keep would be in order), inasmuch as I think it's likely that the user simply is ignorant of policy rather than actively in contravention of policy, but he/she would nevertheless benefit from learning the relevant guidelines and policies).
- Keep Articles are not deleted based on whether we approve of people or not. Though not a major player, they're a notable presence in UK politics. Fan1967 00:48, 14 May 2006 (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.