Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-Administration 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   move to Anti-Administration party. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 03:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Anti-Administration Party

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The references mentioned do not refer much to an "Anti-Administration Party" per se, but rather Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and those who supported them and who later formed Democratic/Republican societies and then the Republican Party after the Washington Administration. Holdek (talk) 11:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nominator per discussion below. Holdek (talk) 18:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Oppose Standard recent sources do indeed use the term" "These factions had been known as the Anti-Administration Party" says . 2) "The Jefferson case study in chapter 3 discusses how Jefferson desired the presidency and how he and his allies built an “anti-administration” party." says and p 22; 3) "Madison and Jefferson were at the center of a “rising anti-Administration party" says ; 4) "Thus the anti-administration party, a legislative party in the sense that its members consciously worked together," says ; 5) the term was used by Orrin G Libby back in 1913: "This may well be considered to mark the end of Jefferson's initial essay at the organization of an anti-administration party." in   And for the record Holdek is wrong about the "Democratic/Republican societies" (they were an entirely different matter a couple years later.) Rjensen (talk) 11:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Rename Anti-Administration party - the proper-noun capitals suggest this was a formal political party whereas the lede (and sources) suggest it was an informal grouping/coalition. There seems to be enough sources to substantiate an article but we shouldn't be suggesting it was a formal political if it wasn't. Stalwart 111  13:38, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment I would be fine with a renaming of the article to remove the proper nouns and to edit the non-lede sections where appropriate so not as to give the impression that this was an organized political party as opposed to an informal faction. Holdek (talk) 21:24, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
 * yesI agree we should rename with "party" instead of "Party" Rjensen (talk) 04:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Holdek, if that would resolve your concerns, do you want to withdraw this nomination so that can be done (renaming while it is the subject of an AFD isn't a great idea). Or do you have other notability concerns? Stalwart 111  07:12, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes I will withdraw my nomination. Holdek (talk) 18:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Per Dr. Jensen's argument above. I also think Stalwart is correct about the matter of capitalization of the P in party and would recommend the closing administrator make this change, if kept. Carrite (talk) 17:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Move to close - has been withdrawn on the basis of a rename being enacted to address nominator concerns. Stalwart 111  22:42, 12 October 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.