Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All-African People's Revolutionary Party


 * 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. Seems like consensus is now that the article meets inclusion criteria. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

All-African People's Revolutionary Party

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Minor party that has never elected a candidate. Page currently is cited exclusively to self-published sources, and it does not appear to have achieved substantial, non-trivial coverage in multiple reliable independent secondary sources. Toa Nidhiki05 15:32, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 18 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep — In all the years I've participated in AfDs, this nomination is by far the worst nomination I have ever had the displeasure of partaking in. It is quite evident that the nominator failed to carry out wp:before. It took me two minutes to find several reliable sources. Please do not waste the community's time with foolish nominations. Article is notable with plenty of RS covering the subject in detail. Here are just some of them : Encyclopedia of Black Studies, American Political Parties in the 21st Century, Encyclopedia of the African Diaspora: Origins, Experiences, and Culture, Volume 2, Still Lifting, Still Climbing: African American Women's Contemporary Activism. Further, the article is notable because it was one of the first of its kind with a worldwide reach in the African diaspora - originally created by Kwame Nkrumah, the person who led Ghana to independence and one of the founding members of the Organisation of African Unity. The principles of this party were well detailed in his book which attracted a huge support among Pan-Africanists, not to mention written about by scholars. I would urge the nominator to withdraw this silly nomination and stop wasting the community's time. Failing that, I urge an admin to perform a snow closure and prevent anymore time wastage.Tamsier (talk) 07:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment — I've added the references myself and expanded the article.Tamsier (talk) 10:28, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * No need to be a dick here. My nomination did exactly what I hoped it would. Toa Nidhiki05 10:42, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Nobody is being a dick here. Your silly nomination is "dikish." And what exactly did you hope for your nomination to do?Tamsier (talk) 11:34, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Either delete the article, merge it, or at the very least get someone to make it not be a pathetic stub, like 99% of articles about minor, insignificant parties are here. I still don’t think this is notable, but at the very least it isn’t a completely embarrassing waste of space at the moment. Toa Nidhiki05</i> 12:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * So you nominated this article in order to get someone else to expand it and source it just because you don't like stub articles! Well, we should save Toa Nidhiki0's reply for posterity. We do not use AfD for that. It is your responsibility to carry out WP:BEFORE prior to nominating anything. We do not use AfD for the reasons you have given above. And I do not believe you now or ever felt that the article fails GNG after the sources I've cited in the article and here. If you truly felt that, you would have debunked them. Therefore, based on your reply above, i believe you nominated this article exactly for the reason you have given above - i.e. to get someone else "to make it not be a pathetic stub" i.e. to expand it. Therefore, your original rationale for deletion was to deceive and manipulate the community. You used our AfD process for disingenuous reasons rather than for what it was designed for. If this is not a reason to SNOW CLOSE this AfD I don't know what is. Perhaps we can also ban the nominator for ever bringing another article to AfD, since he is using our process in contravention of what it was designed for.Tamsier (talk) 13:34, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I have no clue why you are getting so offended I nominated this obscure minor party for deletion. Do you work for this party or something? I’m genuinely baffled here. This article had no citations and has no elected officers. I’ve nominated at least a dozen articles like for deletion, and almost all of them have been deleted because the vast majority of minor political parties aren’t notable.
 * I’ve looked at your sources as well and I think they seem lacking. Source 2 is just a list of political parties, which in and of itself does not provide notability (see WP:ORGDEPTH). Source 5 also fails ORGDEPTH - it is an encyclopedia entry written by Macheo Shabaka, a party member, which means it isn’t independent (see WP:ORGIND), and the book itself seems to just be a list of things relating to Africa. Source 1 is partially blocked but appears similar. This isn’t sufficient evidence of notability, it’s just acknowledging something exists. The party is not mentioned at all on the page for Kwame Nkrumah - given its close association with him, that would seem to be a good merge target. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 13:52, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep trying in order to cover up your disingenuous nomination. You lack understanding of our policies (not to mention your disingenuous nomination) which is why you must be stopped from making any further nominations. I wouldn't even comment on your silly analysis of the sources as you clearly have no understanding of what constitutes a reliable source. I don't care that you nominated this article. What I care about is that you failed to do before, and also nominated this article for disingenuous reasons and wasting our time.Tamsier (talk) 16:12, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If you are going to keep randomly insulting me and putting words in my mouth that I did not say, you’re going to have to do it alone. I have no clue why you are so offended at the idea of deleting this stub page that fails our notability criteria, but whatever. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 16:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as per Tamsier. Note that not getting a candidate elected does not disqualify a political organization for notability. --MarioGom (talk) 09:11, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not an outright disqualifier, no, but a party with membership in only the hundreds which has no elected officers and no coverage outside of inclusion in lists of parties or things relating to Africa is generally not included. Per WP:ORGCRIT, an organization must have "significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable secondary sources". This coverage can't be trivial - per WP:ORGDEPTH, coverage has to be non-trivial - "inclusion in collections that have indiscriminate inclusion criteria (i.e. attempt to include every existing item instead of selecting the best, most notable examples), such as databases, archives, directories, dictionaries, bibliographies, certain almanacs" does not qualify. Moreover, per WP:ORGIND, coverage has to be independent - this disqualifies one of his sources, as it was written by a party member. Tamsier's sources don't establish notability - in fact, they actually undermine claims of notability. This party apparently isn't even notable enough to be on the page of the party's founder, which says a lot - wouldn't it be better suited for inclusion there? <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 16:05, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Right. There are quite a few references in Google Scholar, Google Books and Newspapers.com, and not merely listings. I have not checked in depth though. I have withdrawn my keep vote at the moment. It looks like the article has some facts wrong or distorted. In particular, it looks like the party was not founded by Kwame Nkrumah (see Talk:All-African People's Revolutionary Party). --MarioGom (talk) 19:24, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Rather than repeating myself, I will copy and paste my reply on the article's talk page here. See below:

Can you provide links to these American newspapers your are citing because they are not even in the article. Are you sure you have quoted the newspapers rights or understand what they are saying? If yes, then your American newspapers are wrong, because this is what the academic scholars / reliable sources cited are saying (see below). These include the works of Professor Henry Louis Gates, Jr. (who will touch on Stokeley Carmichael, below); Professor Molefi Kete Asante et. al.; ref author Dave Blevins and Professor Carole Boyce Davies (who went into depth about the female wing). I am limited in what I can copy and paste here for copyvio reasons, so here are what these RS sources are saying:
 * The All-African People's Revolutionary Party (A-APRP) is the brainchild of Ghana's first President, Kwame Nkrumah (1909-1972). The first published call for an A-APRP was in Nkrumah's Handbook of Revolutionary Warfare (1968).... p. 77
 * The All-African Peoples Revolutionary Party (A-APRP) was founded by Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, who introduced the party's concepts and philosophies in his book, Handbook of Revolutionary Warfare, which was released in 1968.'' p. 8
 * Carmichael remained with the Black Panthers for little more than a year, resigning because of the organization's refusal to disavow the participation of white radicals, and in 1969 left America for Africa, where he made his home in Conakry, capital of the People's Revolutionary Republic of Guinea. By then completely devoted to the cause of socialist world revolution emanating from a unified Africa, he became affiliated with the All-African People's Revolutionary Party, a Marxist political party  founded by Kwame Nkrumah, the exiled leader of Ghana then living in Guinea as a guest of its president Sekou Touré. Carmichael changed his name, in honour of his two heroes, to Kwame Ture, and scoured U.S. colleges for several weeks each year speaking on behalf of the party... p. 142

I hope this clarifies the issue. The Carmichael you are referring to changed his name in honour of his two heroes: Kwame (from kwame Nkrumah) and Ture (from Sekou Touré) giving Kwame Ture (i.e. Carmichael).Tamsier (talk) 02:49, 21 July 2019 (UTC)


 * AS for Toa Nidhiki05, I think he is trying to give me a migraine. He has wasted enough of my time already. He is throwing policies left, right, and centre but he does not even understand the policies he is citing nor what constitute a reliable source. And don't get me started on his disingenuous nomination as evident above. The very fact that you failed to notice that this subject has been raised in Kwame's article although not named or link shows that you do not understand the subject. if you go to his page and scroll down to where it says Political philosophy, and read it properly, you will notice that they are referring to to the same subject. The same for Nkrumaism - linked as the main article under that sub-heading. The very fact that you failed to grasp that shows that you have no understanding of the subject and do not want to understand it, but only interested in deleting. Also, just because something is not mention in someone's article does not mean delete or redirect. The UK Queen has to grant royal assent to every bill before it is passed into law. I doubt you will see her article mention anything about royal assent. sometimes common sense must kick in. I think Toa Nidhiki05 is here just to give me a heart attack.Tamsier (talk) 03:28, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Tamsier: Please, remain civil, assume good faith and avoid personal attacks. --MarioGom (talk) 08:19, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It seems to me like you are very personally invested in keeping this page. I don't know if you have a conflict of interest or not but the fact you care so much about this stub article about a random minor party with like 100 members that you'd continually sling random insults and attacks at me is confounding.
 * If, as you say, Nkrumaism, Nkrumah, and this party are so closely connected that talking about one means you are talking about the other, it seems like a merge is the best option, either to Nkrumaism or to Kwame Nkrumah. My points still stand that none of these sources establish notability and that combined with your comments makes a very compelling case for a merge. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 03:48, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * , so you are accusing me of WP:COI now? If you think you have any prove, take it to the appropriate noticeboard. I would love to see that crane crash. Seriously, this is getting funnier and funnier, not to mention sillier as the days go by. This is going to be my last comment here, because I have things to do than wasting anymore of my time on this. I have never edited this article until you brought this article to AfD. Had you looked at the contribution history you would have known that. I didn't even know this article existed until it showed up in Africa and politics related deletion discussions both of which I watch. Therefore, stop playing ruse.
 * , there is no personal attack or assumption of bad faith. We all know or should know by now that this nomination was silly from the get go. Saying that a nomination is silly is not personal attack. I know quite a few editors who would have used even stronger language for such a silly nominations that serves no purpose than to waste the community's time. Believe me! I've used a lot of restrain with my language compared to what some editors would have used for bringing this to AfD, and to be honest, I would not have blamed them. Saying that all this back and forth with the nom who does not even understand the policies they are citing nor what constitutes RS is beginning to give me a migraine or heart attack is not personal attack / bad faith. In fact, him accusing me of COI when I have never edited this article before its AfD nomination (and even if I did so what?) is worst. Further, it was much later when I began to use the word "disingenuous" to describe this nomination, after the nom mention that he nominated this article so that other people can expand it because he does not like stub articles - which was a silly reason for nominating anyway because we don't bring articles to AfD on those grounds, but even worst, a disingenuous nomination because that was not the rationale given initially. Him accusing me of COI without proof however, is more problematic.Tamsier (talk) 09:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:RS and general notability guidelines are two different things. Just saying “RS” over is meaningless because I’m not taking about RS. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 12:19, 21 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per Tamsier. I noticed you stroked off you keep vote but seems to agree with Tamsier in the talk page link you've provided above. Is there a reason? Just curious. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 06:18, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I still see most sources are unclear about the facts there and find it highly suspicious that Kwame Nkrumah is sometimes mentioned as the party founder in a few sources about A-APRP but A-APRP doesn't get mentioned in other sources about Kwame Nkrumah. Cross-posted it on the Kwame Nkrumah talk page to try getting other interested editors involved. That discussion can continue here: Talk:All-African People's Revolutionary Party. --MarioGom (talk) 10:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I am disregarding Tamsier's comments because of their personal attacks. This means more input is needed.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:23, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Admin note: I've blocked Tamsier for six months because of their conduct in this AfD. The long block duration is because they have a long block log for personal attacks and similar misconduct, most recently for three months, as well as a conditionally lifted WP:NOTHERE indefinite block.  Sandstein   08:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep The entries in the Encyclopedia of the African Diaspora and Encyclopedia of Black Studies demonstrate notability.  See WP:ATD, WP:BEFORE, WP:NOTCLEANUP, WP:PRESERVE, &c. Andrew D. (talk) 09:42, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:RS subject is notable. WP:BEFORE Lightburst (talk) 13:04, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Subject meets WP:GNG as is shown by the new content and referencing, and Tamsier is to be congratulated on the improvements. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree. Tamsier did an amazing job improving the article. Did he deserve to be blocked? No, in my opinion. Senegambianamestudy (talk) 00:06, 1 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. I did not look at this article when it was first nominated but in its current state I don’t think there’s any doubt it meets notability requirements. Mccapra (talk) 07:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.