Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trotskyist League of 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. Article also moved to Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Trotskyist League of Canada. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 21:46, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trotskyist League of Canada[edit]

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

non-notable. Lack of reliable sources and it is unlikely that significant sources will ever be found. Dynamic Cascade (talk) 19:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The article could do with more info, like how many members etc. The League exists, and so does the publication. - what are the sales? Trotskyism is a bit out at the moment, but there might be notability here if more is added to the article. Peridon (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, self-promotion. My left index finger exists but has no wikipedia entry. It needs to be mentioned in media or literature to deserve an article. New seeker (talk) 10:22, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 17:02, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 17:02, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I can't find any good sources on Google or Google News,[1][2][3][4] appears to fail WP:N, and has no reasonable target for a redirect. --Explodicle (T/C) 17:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep There are some google news, books and scholar hits. I fail to understand the nominating editor's comment about it being "unlikely that significant sources will ever be found." That's an unprovable assumption. We can only go by what we have now. There seems to be a history here as a splinter group from a previous organization. A merge to Revolutionary Marxist Group (Canada) would be a possibility. I think with a bit of work, legitimate sources could be gleaned from the rest and this article could be saved. freshacconci talktalk 18:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't find any sources by the time the AfD closes, this might be a good candidate for the article incubator. --Explodicle (T/C) 18:29, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware of that. A nice idea (and this from someone who tends to tilt towards "deletionist" on the scale). Thanks for the heads-up. freshacconci talktalk 18:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:45, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what I am suppose to do in order to keep this article alive. But this group is quite active. They often have meetings scheduled at my local university (the University of British Columbia)Children of the dragon (talk) 10:02, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, find some references that will support the notability of the group - rather than just its existence. Peridon (talk) 20:35, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incubate to Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Trotskyist League of Canada per the suggestion by Explodicle. I cannot find significant coverage in reliable sources. A Google News Archive search and a Google Books search return mainly passing mentions. Cunard (talk) 00:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:02, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm aware of this org and I consider it to be prominent enough and here's a link to check on [5] (Starman005 (talk) 12:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC))[reply]
Comment That's a Google Australia search not a relevant reference. Please provide actual links if there are any. Peridon (talk) 21:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it's barely an article. If someone wwants to do some real research and create a real wikipedia article about it, perhaps it would be better, but for what's there now, it's not worth having an article. Alan - talk 05:37, 16 November 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.