500:; it is appropriate to point out the commonalities; this posting is transparent, not biased/selective in where it is posted, is not posted to user talk pages. My message does indeed have a point, that at worst any article should be merged and redirected, not deleted, which I think is reasonable to share and post at every one of these. I further suggest that others having any view post at every one of the AFDs (no matter what is your view). --
266:
He has also ran in council elections in
Reading, as the article says with a source. He ran in two European elections, the £5,000 to run making it a notable repeat feat. With the range of far-right/left parties featured on this encyclopedia without even running in any large-scale elections, I don't
342:
has been shown when editors responded, I believe the only reasonable outcome is keep. No complaint about this nominator meant at all, but I have seen other series of related AFDs put forward by other persons which have turned out to be not-well-thought-out, and this, like those other campaigns,
338:. This is one of a number of UK political party AFDs opened by same nominator. All seem to have been registered political parties. This one fielded a candidate in at least one election, received thousands of votes, and has received coverage. As with all the others, where referencing meeting
204:
A curiosity of a party, yes, but not notable. Only present as an also-ran in one specific kind of elections, no cultural importance, no notability, almost no credible third party coverage. Nothing to indicate importance, and nothing to suggest is should remain on
Knowledge (XXG).
495:
Note: in response to one or two previous deletion campaigns that I have noticed (not involving the current deletion nominator), i have posted notice of the multiple AFDs going on at some of the AFDs, and given links to other AFDs. This is NOT
426:
472:
I rather object to all of these going on separately, as this is expensive of community attention. In fact I suggest it is inappropriate to open multiple related AFDs separately rather than as part of one multiple article AFD (see
308:
Delete this and anyone later looking at the articles on the constituencies contested by the party will be left in total ignorance about what the results show. If you can't look up Roman Party in
Knowledge (XXG), where can you?
401:
421:
381:
173:
460:
411:
376:
449:
406:
391:
343:
seems wasteful of community attention. When/if a number of the AFDs in a campaign are clearly failing, I think the appropriate thing for the nominator to do is to withdraw all the others. --
455:
386:
222:
283:
126:
435:
For this one note the deletion nominator has further disputed the list-item notability of the
Patriotic Socialist Party, deleting its entry in the List of UK political parties by
396:
477:). But after asking the deletion nominator of most of these to withdraw some, and finding no agreement on their part (rather than withdraw any AFDs, the deletion nominator
465:
244:
315:
If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list.
167:
487:
481:), and from past experience about AFDs, I expect there's no way to stop the separate AFDs going on. Some of them are headed for KEEP already, IMO.
133:
492:
And, IMO, they should all probably be KEPT, as there is documentation of party registration for every one I believe, and there is coverage.
369:. There are about 15 simultaneous AFDs about UK political parties going on, including about 11 alphabetically, started a little while ago:
17:
99:
94:
103:
570:, all sources are passing mentions, with the exception of one in-depth source in the local newspaper, which isn't enough.
511:
354:
272:
188:
155:
86:
593:
40:
531:
551:
268:
149:
497:
310:
253:
231:
589:
527:
145:
36:
574:
558:
535:
516:
474:
359:
326:
295:
276:
258:
236:
214:
68:
64:
490:, keeping the edit history available to properly credit contributions and to facilitate re-creation.
544:
210:
195:
181:
322:
506:
349:
291:
248:
226:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
588:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
90:
567:
339:
53:
161:
206:
318:
501:
344:
287:
120:
571:
427:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Patriotic
Socialist Party (2nd nomination)
82:
74:
402:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Libertarian Party (UK) (5th nomination)
526:. Clearly notable, as judged by significant coverage in reliable sources.
422:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/The Common Good (political party)
382:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Britannica Party (3rd nomination)
446:
And four more recent additions (the asserted new "tranche" of AFDs?):
461:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Scottish
Democratic Alliance
582:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
412:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/New
Nationalist Party (UK)
377:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/4 Freedoms Party (UK EPP)
450:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Fishing Party (Scotland)
407:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Miss Great
Britain Party
392:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Fishing Party (Scotland)
456:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Independent Green Voice
484:
Not a single one of these articles should be deleted, IMO.
387:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Countryside Party (UK)
317:" The article amply demonstrates that it passes this test.
397:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Free
England Party
479:
has stated that they plan to open a new tranche of AFDs
478:
436:
116:
112:
108:
180:
486:
At worst, an article can be MERGED and REDIRECTED to
466:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Yorkshire First
267:
really see the harm in keeping the Roman Party here
223:
list of United
Kingdom-related deletion discussions
194:
284:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions
417:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Roman Party
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
596:). No further edits should be made to this page.
488:List of political parties in the United Kingdom
245:list of Politics-related deletion discussions
8:
282:Note: This debate has been included in the
243:Note: This debate has been included in the
221:Note: This debate has been included in the
281:
242:
220:
367:Comment (duplicate posting to 15 AFDs)
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
1:
559:20:09, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
536:15:40, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
517:19:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
360:21:38, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
327:12:09, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
296:02:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
277:01:56, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
259:01:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
237:01:39, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
215:01:33, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
575:23:35, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
69:11:10, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
613:
311:Knowledge (XXG):Notability
585:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
48:The result was
298:
261:
239:
604:
587:
556:
549:
528:Jonathan A Jones
514:
509:
504:
357:
352:
347:
256:
251:
234:
229:
199:
198:
184:
136:
124:
106:
34:
612:
611:
607:
606:
605:
603:
602:
601:
600:
594:deletion review
583:
552:
545:
512:
507:
502:
355:
350:
345:
254:
249:
232:
227:
213:
141:
132:
97:
81:
78:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
610:
608:
599:
598:
578:
577:
561:
538:
520:
519:
493:
482:
470:
469:
468:
463:
458:
453:
444:
443:
442:
441:
440:
430:
429:
424:
419:
414:
409:
404:
399:
394:
389:
384:
379:
371:
370:
363:
362:
332:
331:
330:
329:
300:
299:
279:
263:
262:
240:
209:
202:
201:
138:
77:
72:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
609:
597:
595:
591:
586:
580:
579:
576:
573:
569:
565:
562:
560:
557:
555:
550:
548:
542:
539:
537:
533:
529:
525:
522:
521:
518:
515:
510:
505:
499:
498:wp:canvassing
494:
491:
489:
483:
480:
476:
471:
467:
464:
462:
459:
457:
454:
451:
448:
447:
445:
438:
434:
433:
432:
431:
428:
425:
423:
420:
418:
415:
413:
410:
408:
405:
403:
400:
398:
395:
393:
390:
388:
385:
383:
380:
378:
375:
374:
373:
372:
368:
365:
364:
361:
358:
353:
348:
341:
337:
334:
333:
328:
324:
320:
316:
312:
307:
304:
303:
302:
301:
297:
293:
289:
285:
280:
278:
274:
270:
265:
264:
260:
257:
252:
246:
241:
238:
235:
230:
224:
219:
218:
217:
216:
212:
208:
197:
193:
190:
187:
183:
179:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
147:
144:
143:Find sources:
139:
135:
131:
128:
122:
118:
114:
110:
105:
101:
96:
92:
88:
84:
80:
79:
76:
73:
71:
70:
66:
62:
60:
56:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
584:
581:
563:
553:
546:
543:per GNG. --
540:
523:
485:
416:
366:
335:
314:
305:
250:Everymorning
228:Everymorning
203:
191:
185:
177:
170:
164:
158:
152:
142:
129:
58:
54:
49:
47:
31:
28:
475:WP:MULTIAFD
168:free images
83:Roman Party
75:Roman Party
255:talk to me
233:talk to me
590:talk page
437:this edit
313:states, "
288:• Gene93k
269:'''tAD'''
37:talk page
592:or in a
319:Emeraude
127:View log
39:or in a
207:doktorb
174:WP refs
162:scholar
100:protect
95:history
572:Secret
568:WP:GNG
566:fails
564:Delete
340:wp:GNG
146:Google
104:delete
547:Green
211:words
189:JSTOR
150:books
134:Stats
121:views
113:watch
109:links
61:alton
16:<
541:Keep
532:talk
524:Keep
336:Keep
323:talk
306:Keep
292:talk
273:talk
182:FENS
156:news
117:logs
91:talk
87:edit
65:talk
50:keep
508:ncr
351:ncr
196:TWL
125:– (
57:am
534:)
513:am
503:do
356:am
346:do
325:)
294:)
286:.
275:)
247:.
225:.
176:)
119:|
115:|
111:|
107:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
67:)
52:.
554:C
530:(
452:
439:.
321:(
290:(
271:(
200:)
192:·
186:·
178:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
153:·
148:(
140:(
137:)
130:·
123:)
85:(
63:(
59:W
55:S
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.