Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/We Demand a Referendum - Knowledge

Source 📝

409:- I found out about this party from a BBC show "Daily Politics" which did not feature Nikki Sinclair, but another woman Katie Hopkins (sp?). I vote to keep, since this is now a party with notoriety thanks to the BBC and some newspapers as others have mentioned. I have no political connect to this or any British party. 197:
Fails notability and political policies. Fails GNG. Fails our policies and consensus on notable lobby/pressure groups. Lobby group without notability beyond the Internet. Has no constant, consistent non-Internet coverage. Article suffers from bias. Not a political group in any definition of the term
219:
Proponent claims WDAR has no notability beyond the Internet. Yet the Sun and Express articles, for example, have been published both online and in their print versions. It has also been widely discussed on radio programmes, of which the source quoted in the article itself is just one example. Other
284:
Proponent claims this is not a political group in any definition of the term in the UK. Yet the party has been registered with the Electoral Commission since June this year; if being registered with the EC as a political party is not a definition of "political group", then what
166: 310:, until there's clear evidence this is a real political party that stands in elections, rather than one person's crusade that could peter out before the euro elections. There are some sources, but mostly about Sinclaire 260:
The original work is by the BBC, which is what should count for the purposes of judging notability. Sinclaire just uploaded the video, nothing else. She clearly didn't stage the interview on a fake BBC set.
281:
Proponent claims the article suffers from bias. Yet the main contributor to the article (me) is staunchly pro-EU, so accusing me of trying to embellish information on WDAR is ridiculous.
427: 119: 160: 447: 52:. It looks like there is consensus not to delete, but no consensus as to whether the article should be kept or merged. I suggest opening a merge discussion on the talk page. 311: 467: 92: 87: 126: 96: 358:
giving us significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources (assuming you believe 2 is "multiple"). And I didn't really want a photo of
79: 315: 410: 181: 148: 372: 253: 17: 142: 520: 503: 479: 459: 439: 418: 397: 374: 326: 296: 272: 255: 207: 83: 61: 313: 138: 539: 40: 386:: source 1 has been replaced with a non-primary source, making it at least three independent, reliable sources. 188: 414: 322: 221: 516: 392: 291: 267: 75: 67: 535: 499: 57: 36: 370: 251: 154: 203: 174: 318: 512: 475: 455: 435: 387: 335: 286: 262: 236: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
534:
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
495: 53: 491: 363: 307: 244: 199: 359: 351: 471: 451: 431: 347: 343: 229: 113: 339: 240: 235:
That video link is by the user "nikkisinclairemp", and therefore a
317:- it's mostly local press from around Sinclaire's constituency. -- 528:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
198:
in the UK, not to mention any of the constituent parts.
109: 105: 101: 173: 428:
list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions
448:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions 216:Accusations levelled at the article are baseless. 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 542:). No further edits should be made to this page. 222:an interview of a party candidate on the BBC's 468:list of Politics-related deletion discussions 187: 8: 466:Note: This debate has been included in the 446:Note: This debate has been included in the 426:Note: This debate has been included in the 220:high-profile non-Internet coverage includes 362:thrown in my face while eating my lunch. -- 465: 445: 425: 342:. 3 is a press release, and hence not 7: 346:. That leaves an article each from 24: 334:- sources 1, 3, 5 and 6 are all 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 521:00:38, 29 September 2012 (UTC) 504:19:05, 28 September 2012 (UTC) 480:01:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC) 460:01:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC) 440:01:25, 27 September 2012 (UTC) 419:00:52, 27 September 2012 (UTC) 398:12:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC) 375:11:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC) 327:11:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC) 297:08:32, 24 September 2012 (UTC) 273:12:42, 24 September 2012 (UTC) 256:12:38, 24 September 2012 (UTC) 208:20:59, 23 September 2012 (UTC) 62:20:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC) 1: 228:alongside UKIP deputy leader 338:, not suitable for testing 559: 511:to founder, as per above. 531:Please do not modify it. 32:Please do not modify it. 239:- no good for helping 76:We Demand a Referendum 68:We Demand a Referendum 494:per Colapeninsula. 48:The result was 482: 462: 442: 550: 533: 368: 249: 192: 191: 177: 129: 117: 99: 34: 558: 557: 553: 552: 551: 549: 548: 547: 546: 540:deletion review 529: 492:Nikki Sinclaire 364: 336:primary sources 308:Nikki Sinclaire 245: 206: 134: 125: 90: 74: 71: 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 556: 554: 545: 544: 524: 523: 506: 484: 483: 463: 443: 422: 421: 403: 402: 401: 400: 378: 377: 329: 300: 299: 282: 279: 278: 277: 276: 275: 237:primary source 224:Daily Politics 217: 202: 195: 194: 131: 70: 65: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 555: 543: 541: 537: 532: 526: 525: 522: 518: 514: 510: 507: 505: 501: 497: 493: 489: 486: 485: 481: 477: 473: 469: 464: 461: 457: 453: 449: 444: 441: 437: 433: 429: 424: 423: 420: 416: 412: 411:78.52.102.235 408: 405: 404: 399: 395: 394: 389: 385: 382: 381: 380: 379: 376: 373: 371: 369: 367: 361: 360:Katie Hopkins 357: 353: 352:Daily Express 349: 345: 341: 337: 333: 330: 328: 324: 320: 319:Colapeninsula 316: 314: 312: 309: 305: 302: 301: 298: 294: 293: 288: 283: 280: 274: 270: 269: 264: 259: 258: 257: 254: 252: 250: 248: 242: 238: 234: 233: 231: 227: 225: 218: 215: 212: 211: 210: 209: 205: 201: 190: 186: 183: 180: 176: 172: 168: 165: 162: 159: 156: 153: 150: 147: 144: 140: 137: 136:Find sources: 132: 128: 124: 121: 115: 111: 107: 103: 98: 94: 89: 85: 81: 77: 73: 72: 69: 66: 64: 63: 59: 55: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 530: 527: 513:Stuartyeates 508: 487: 406: 391: 388:Leptictidium 383: 365: 355: 331: 303: 290: 287:Leptictidium 266: 263:Leptictidium 246: 230:Paul Nuttall 223: 214:Speedy keep: 213: 196: 184: 178: 170: 163: 157: 151: 145: 135: 122: 50:no consensus 49: 47: 31: 28: 496:MilborneOne 344:independent 161:free images 54:Mark Arsten 366:Ritchie333 340:notability 247:Ritchie333 241:notability 536:talk page 472:• Gene93k 452:• Gene93k 432:• Gene93k 332:Weak keep 37:talk page 538:or in a 350:and the 120:View log 39:or in a 384:Comment 348:The Sun 200:doktorb 167:WP refs 155:scholar 93:protect 88:history 139:Google 97:delete 509:Merge 488:Merge 304:merge 285:is?-- 204:words 182:JSTOR 143:books 127:Stats 114:views 106:watch 102:links 16:< 517:talk 500:talk 476:talk 456:talk 436:talk 415:talk 407:Keep 356:just 323:talk 243:. -- 226:show 175:FENS 149:news 110:logs 84:talk 80:edit 58:talk 490:to 306:to 189:TWL 118:– ( 519:) 502:) 478:) 470:. 458:) 450:. 438:) 430:. 417:) 396:) 393:mt 354:, 325:) 295:) 292:mt 271:) 268:mt 261:-- 232:. 169:) 112:| 108:| 104:| 100:| 95:| 91:| 86:| 82:| 60:) 515:( 498:( 474:( 454:( 434:( 413:( 390:( 321:( 289:( 265:( 193:) 185:· 179:· 171:· 164:· 158:· 152:· 146:· 141:( 133:( 130:) 123:· 116:) 78:( 56:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
Mark Arsten
talk
20:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
We Demand a Referendum
We Demand a Referendum
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
Stats
Google
books
news
scholar
free images
WP refs
FENS
JSTOR
TWL
doktorb
words

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.