Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Animal Protection 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   keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Animal Protection Party
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Simply not notable by Wikipedia standards. A very minor party with no evidence of any campaigning after the 2010 general election, and have not taken part in any Westminster by-elections since 2010. Not notable, not important, no evidence of significant results or significant campaigning during or after the election. doktorb wordsdeeds 06:55, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Not successful, certainly, but it didn't expect to be in terms of winning seats. Consider this: in time to come (or today!) you're reading up on British elections and election results and somewhere there's a table of candidates or whatever that includes the Animal Protection Party. The book won't tell you much; after all, it concentrates on the three major parties and the largest of the others. So where do you go to find out more? To an encyclopaedia, of course. But not, apparently, Wikipedia! (And as a former student and teacher of political science, I can testify that this a recurring problem.) Emeraude (talk) 11:51, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, political party presenting candidates across multiple constituencies, part of interesting phenomenon of Animal Rights in party politics. --Soman (talk) 14:02, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * How many candidates User:Soman at the 2010 election? And how many since? doktorb wordsdeeds 16:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Four candidates in 2010. To my knowledge in general elections have been held since (by-elections are not a good indicator). It should also be understood that, seeing how the constituencies were selected, the goal of the election campaign was not to get MPs elected but rather to raise concern about issues. --Soman (talk) 17:03, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * So a single-issue party stood in 4 seats, failed to get elected, and we have to include them on Wikipedia? doktorb wordsdeeds 17:21, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:31, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:31, 13 July 2013 (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.