Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free England Party (2nd nomination)

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. I must discount Emeraude's opinion because it consists only of personal attacks, which may result in a block if repeated. Sandstein 09:07, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Free England Party[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)

Wikipedia is not a Gazetteer of political parties. Although there are citations, this article only proves the party existed, rather than give any evidence of notability or achievements prior to, or following, an election campaign. Citations prove the party stood for election, but that is expected of political parties so is not notable enough to satisfy GNG or ORG guidelines. Usefulness is not a valid reason to retain. doktorb _words^deeds 20:58, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. doktorb _words^deeds 20:58, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. doktorb _words^deeds 20:58, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. doktorb _words^deeds 20:58, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nominator is on a crusade to delete articles on minor political parties. They nominated this article before and the result was keep. The same is true of numerous other articles. It cannot be acceptable to keep coming back for several bites at a cherry. One must consider that the motive is something other than creating an exclusive encyclopaedia. Emeraude (talk) 08:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This vote is not policy lead. The editor has also been absent from discussions which deleted or removed articles such as Suffolk Together, PPPILA, Life and Liberty Party, Cymru Annibynnol, Common Sense Party (UK) and others, which the community agreed had no place in an encyclopedia. I suggest that the editor refresh their knowledge and understanding of what Wikipedia is WP:NOT. doktorb _words^deeds 10:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: discussions of whether other similar articles exist or not should generally be avoided in deletion discussions per WP:OTHERSTUFF. Seagull123 Φ 16:46, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply Hey Seagull123. I think this is a case of "other stuff no longer exists" if you look at how many successful AfDs have been passed by the wider community. Also I have to direct you to an series of AfDs of which Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former throne of Baden is a good example, where there was over 20 successful nominations, all of which had to be seen in the wider context of there being a series or pattern. The editor I was responding to votes "Keep" for each and every nomination in which they take part, which has to be seen for what it is, too, I suggest. However I am concerned that there is a misunderstanding about political parties and their 'right' to an article on Wikipedia. The wider community has agreed with me numerous times that minor political parties do not have an automatic right to an article here and it is worth showing this when making an argument for a further deletion. Yes, you're right, the Other Stuff Exists policy is something to consider. But the success of previous AfDs on this very subject should be considered too. doktorb _words^deeds 07:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Short-lived group with sources only being official results and their own website; receiving 367 votes or 1% in local elections does not win you an article here. Could have more content at English_independence#Organisations. Reywas92^Talk 02:18, 24 August 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.