Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perceptions of the Tea Party movement

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. Michig (talk) 05:38, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perceptions of the Tea Party movement[edit]

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

This article repeats much of the information in Tea Party movement, and the little it doesn't repeat seems to be WP:POV related. There isn't enough different information to justify another article. Moreover, it seems to be another means to wage content disputes over the tea party and related pages. This is very similar to the Agenda of the Tea Party movement and the deletion discussion taking place on that article. I would suggest the page needs to be deleted and the section needs to be developed in the article Tea Party Movement. If it eventually makes sense to make a sub-page, do it at that point. Casprings (talk) 01:50, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 01:56, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Casprings (talk) 01:56, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - An inherent content fork, in my opinion. Carrite (talk) 02:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Conservatism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I agree with Carrite; this seems like an unnecessary content fork to me. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 05:44, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems to be a coatrack contrary to WP:SOAP. Now that Arbcom has acted to keep activists away, it's time for fresh start with the main article and forks like this should be cleared away to simplify that process. Warden (talk) 12:58, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is another fork of the article that is not justified.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The "Agenda" article was already deleted for being a content fork. This one is as well, and should also be deleted. Egsan Bacon (talk) 17:21, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Dumb content fork. Neutrality^talk 04:35, 17 September 2013 (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.