Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bosnian Movement of National Pride (Bosnia and Herzegovina)


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Bosnian Movement of National Pride (Bosnia and Herzegovina)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:20, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bosnia-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:21, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Cliff Smith 18:22, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This BiH political party appears to be As always, more than happy to be proven wrong. Shirt58 (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * either so small that it fails WP:CORP; or,
 * possibly non-existent.
 * Comment I'm a bit confused. This new neo-nazi party is called Bosanski Pokret Nacionalnog Ponosa Bosne i Hercegovine. It is almost certainly a not notable organization. There is, however, another nationalist party in BiH, called Bosanski Pokret Nacionalnog Ponosa. It is older and more notable, at least in my opinion. We should not confuse these two subjects. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Judging by their page, it was an organization (founded in 2009), then turned political party. It was noticed back in 2010 by media, and in early 2012 Bosnian politicians noticed their pamphlet campaign in some cities (a politician says "they have existed for two years"). The name should be Bosnian Movement of National Pride. However, it is evidently a small, close to non-existant organization, with a bad homepage and no official leader. More sources are needed to support notability.--Z oupan 14:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)




 * Keep - I favor the lowest of all possible notability barriers for political parties, their leaders, and their youth sections, regardless of ideology. If existence can be confirmed, they should be included in the same way that we automatically include villages, rivers, highways, high schools, and professional athletes — this is just the sort of material that SHOULD be in an encyclopedia. So: Keep under the policy of WP:IGNORE ALL RULES, which should trump the notability guidelines (lower level of organizational law) here — use common sense to build the encyclopedia. Carrite (talk) 04:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - While I agree in principle with Carrite that political parties should be one of the things that are de facto "automatically notable", the fact the party, according to the article, claims a membership of only 28 gives me pause... - The Bushranger One ping only 19:10, 7 August 2012 (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.