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

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. Stifle (talk) 13:23, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pakeha Party

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

Political party that never registered, incorporated or did anything at all. Haminoon (talk) 04:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 05:05, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 05:05, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per nom. Has proven to be even less notable than at the time of last nomination for Afd. Clearly a transient media beatup with no ongoing SIGCOV. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 05:29, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I note that "even less notable than at the time of the nomination" is an invalid argument according to WP:NOTTEMPORARY. Schwede 66 03:35, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The media coverage was limited to a few weeks, but this is probably true for many notable events. As there are no new facts since the last discussion, I do not see a need to delete the article. Inwind (talk) 11:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As per nom. Not a notable political party. Mattlore (talk) 22:51, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, basically non-existent microparty cum facebook page. This supposed party has never registered as a political party, has never run a candidate for office, and basically fell off the national radar after a brief stint in the limelight in July 2013. Maybe they would have become notable or influential if they had defined themselves as a lobbying or pressure group, but by pretending to be a political party they lost any claim to legitimacy. --MelanieN (talk) 23:47, 4 February 2015 (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.