Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Burning Pink

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 keep. The arguments for keeping are more numerous and more persuasive. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Burning Pink

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Burning Pink (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Wikipedia is not a Gazetteer of political parties. Nothing notable achieved by the Party. The citations, while plentiful, offer nothing much once the mundane, administrative and expected have been stripped away. Intend to stand for election, so I suspect we have some potential misuse of Wikipedia as a free publicity tool alongside a clear failure to meet GNG standards. doktorb _words^deeds 23:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. doktorb _words^deeds 23:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: "Wikipedia is not a Gazetteer of political parties" -- rather, "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia: It combines many features of general and specialized encyclopedias, almanacs, and gazetteers." Vaticidalprophet (talk) 23:58, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete per nom. AnotherEditor144 ^{talk contribs} 09:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

• Keep: Registered political party with media coverage and expected to field a candidate in forthcoming mayoral election as verified in independent news sources. PamD 11:10, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

• Keep: There is significant coverage and will be more.Charles (talk) 18:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. If we delete political parties because they havent achieved anything notable we wont have many left. Rathfelder (talk) 00:15, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: It appears to be a real political movement that has been reported on significantly in the mainstream media, so meeting the general notability guideline threshold for subject matter. The article complies with the requirements of neutrality, verifiability, not being advertising and no original research. No obvious reason it should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neil Cotter (talk • contribs) 02:50, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

• Delete Fails WP:N. Minor political party with no elected representatives. If it does succeed, then an article can be made at that point. --RaviC (talk) 10:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: Meets criteria for inclusion — there is signficant coverage, is independent of the subject and comes from reliable secondary sources. It is a registered political party and established direct action group. Viséan (talk) 13:00, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

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.