Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northern Independence Party (2nd nomination)

Northern Independence Party

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

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

Contested CSD. Party had been deleted before. Wikipedia is not a gazetteer of political parties. No record or proof of notabity. Not on Register of Political Parties. Fails GNG. Clear COI and promotional editing. doktorb _words^deeds 12:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. doktorb _words^deeds 12:27, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for bringing this here - this is the correct approach to consider this. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Have to agree with doktorb- wikipedia is not a gazetteer for every microparty under the sun (especially ones which, by their own admission, do not have electoral commission recognition). The article was quite clearly written as self-promotion by supporters ahead of the upcoming by-election, with the only citations being offered being citations that weren't considered notable enough last time this was all discussed, or a "they exist", which isn't enough to establish notability. Those citations are well enough to establish it in the wikipage for the Hartlepool by-election, but still isn't enough for its own article.BitterGiant (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:35, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:35, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per OP and BiitterGiant. The last AfD wasn't that long ago and very little has changed since then. — Czello 12:45, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the article has 9 references from different UK local papers as well as the national paper the Independent. It’s difficult to say given that much coverage that it isn’t notable enough to exist. Especially given most of those articles are exclusively about the party itself.

They are now running in the Hartlepool by-election - that is the change in circumstances. I wouldn't expect them to win that but I wouldn't expect them to lost their deposit either (i.e. they will get more than 5% of the vote). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that this is against WP:CRYSTAL doktorb _words^deeds 14:47, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Getting involved since I received a delete notice while I only created a helpful redirect after a deletion that I supported. If a party is now officially running, there may be a case to keep. Previously, I favored deleting because the party did not exist. In that case, the discussion belongs in the broader movement. gidonb (talk) 13:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – the last AfD had more support for keeping than deleting, and since then their standing in a by-election only increases their notability. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 14:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it increases their publicity. Not necessarily their notabity. doktorb _words^deeds 14:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The relevant standard is WP:NORG. We've got multiple examples of WP:SIGCOV in the article. The publications include ones covering all Yorkshire (i.e., regional sources per WP:AUD). I've got questions about whether the coverage is WP:LASTING but the coverage of the Hartlepool byelection appears to address this. Registration or not doesn't matter. Previous deletion doesn't matter given the coverage that has come out since deletion. COI/WP:PROMO doesn't matter if the article can be edited to be WP:NPOV, and it obviously can be. The nom is correct that Wiki is not a gazeteer for every minor party - but we certainly can have articles on those that receive significant coverage in reliable sources, and this one has. FOARP (talk) 15:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The party's foundation got a fair bit of coverage in the left-wing press and their decision to run in Hartlepool has gathered a fair bit of interest as well. Passes WP:GNG. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]