Talk:California National Party

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... there are registered voters in California who have registered with this party, it has been recognized as a political body by the California Secretary of State's office, it has a candidate who is running for elective office under this party platform, it contains references to media acknowledgement (more listed below), as well as the political party's lengthy 165-page platform. --Nansy131 (talk) 03:13, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

US News LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/local/abcarian/la-me-0122-abcarian-california-independence-20160122-column.html Sacramento Bee: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article54004530.html Vice News: http://www.vice.com/read/meet-the-californians-inspired-by-scotland-to-pursue-independent-nationhood

International News Canada: http://www.cknw.com/2016/02/22/california-dreaming-political-party-has-big-plans-for-independence/ Scotland: http://www.scotsman.com/news/yes-scotland-logo-adopted-by-california-independence-movement-1-4037382 France: http://www.ouest-france.fr/monde/etats-unis/cet-homme-veut-lindependance-de-la-californie-4088854

Secretary of State http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/ccrov/pdf/2016/january/16013ms.pdf

Russian connection
Why isn't the topic of Russia pushing this agenda and supporting financially and logistically the major secessionist groups in the U.S.? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/21/us/yes-california-calexit-marinelli-russia.html https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2016/12/13/from-his-home-in-russia-calexit-leader-plots-california-secession/ Both articles discuss that many of these groups are getting financial backing and logistical support from Russia. 96.31.177.52 (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
 * This is interesting information, I think it warrants inclusion. Feel free to add something about it, otherwise I will try and get around to it. AusLondonder (talk) 08:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Article under construction
I've been keeping tabs on this article since it popped up in the new pages feed. I think that it's likely that this is now a notable subject and thus should have an article, but as currently written it has a lot of content that appears to be WP:UNDUE, namely the detailed listing of the party's policy stances. If such stances are not mentioned in independent coverage of the subject, we should not be including them here. Normally I would just make these edits myself, but given that the under construction tag is still up, I figured it would be best to discuss this on the talk page instead of unilaterally making edits. signed,Rosguill talk 23:25, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

The party seems to no longer be active.
After checking here, it seems like they are no longer active. There website does not contain anything from this year. And does not seem to want to try and register for political party status for the 2024 Elections. Qutlooker (talk) 14:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)