Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Marxist Tendency (Canada)

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. Davewild (talk) 11:25, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

International Marxist Tendency (Canada)[edit]

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

Non-notable, marginal group. No independent or reliable sources regarding the group. All the sources that actually are about the group itself are from the group's website, the website of its parent organization (IMT/In Defence of Marxism) or from its front groups (Hands Off Venezuela) except for one non-reliable source which is from a rival organization. The only other source, the Daily Telegraph, is an article that doesn't even mention the group and isn't about it at all but about Ted Grant who was the leader of the group's parent organization. Oromantise (talk) 21:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Oromantise (talk) 21:40, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge, As a publication (NOT a "group" from what I can tell) the article is within its rights to self-source in accordance with WP:SELFSOURCE. As for whether it's notable or not is difficult to tell with publications such as this, as it's unlikely it will be mentioned elsewhere as it is a publication itself (just as a music publication is unlikely to mention another music publication). I think the Daily Telegraph reference is relevant as it is about Ted Grant who is involved with the group from what I can see. I'd recommend that it is merged to the International Marxist Tendency in accordance with WP:BRANCH. RatRat (talk) 22:02, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:24, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:40, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:SELFSOURCE NegroLeagueHistorian (talk) 14:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: SELFSOURCE allows a primary source to be used for informational purposes about itself. What it doesn't allow is for those sources to be used as evidence of notability, and that's what at question here. Notability hasn't been demonstrated. Nha Trang ^Allons! 18:13, 1 May 2015 (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.