Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Labor Party (United States, 1996)

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 keep. Sandstein 19:12, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Labor Party (United States, 1996)[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)

Minor socialist party with no history of electoral success and no WP:SIGCOV in third-party, reliable sources. Toa Nidhiki05 16:06, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Washington, D.C.. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:09, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Once notable, always notable. It's hard to remember that far back, but at one time this was actually a big deal within the left wing of the U.S. labor movement. While it turned out to be another fizzle, like the Citizens Party, it attracted some serious national attention and worried the usual establishment figures within both the Democratic Party and the labor bureaucracy. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:14, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What evidence of there is original notability? The article doesn't have any independent sourcing! Toa Nidhiki05 17:30, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. See [1] [2], [3] for just a few examples.--User:Namiba 17:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sufficient sourcing is provided. --Enos733 (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep 2 minute search on newspapers.com turns up thousands of items of press coverage ... even leaving aside alternate spellings of the UK or Israeli parties, there's a vast amount of material that clearly shows notability. Easily passes WP:NONPROFIT. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:18, 26 March 2022 (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.