Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/North-wing politics

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. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:57, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

North-wing politics[edit]

This is a long term orphaned article. It is poorly referenced and there is no demonstration of notability for the term "north wing" in this political sense. Googling shows it used by a few bloggers but not to a great extent. I did not find any RS use of it on the first few pages. There is background material of possible merit here but it duplicates that of Political Compass and I hesitate to suggest a merge of unreferenced material.. DanielRigal (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. —DanielRigal (talk) 16:21, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Dicdef, neologism, no sources. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 16:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:20, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Article is contingent on a particular interpretation of a political compass chart, and proposes terminology that appears to be an endorsement of the contents of the (dead) link quoted at length in the article. No reliable sources. TheFeds 02:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just checked archive.org, and the northwing.org site was a personal political blog—that's not an appropriate reference, in the slightest. It's probably a neologism, possibly spawned from that site. TheFeds 02:25, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per above - 2 ... says you, says me 03:00, 20 June 2009 (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.