Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Campaign for an Independent Britain


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 22:20, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Campaign for an Independent Britain

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This article makes no claim for notability in its current sources under either WP:ORGCRIT or WP:CLUB as a non-commercial organisation. The current source is a letter by a former official and clearly fails. I searched for independent and reliable sources and found none that I could confirm give it significant coverage. All were trivial mentions of it or of what appears at best to be its Oxford chapter. I did find one that could potential mention it, but it is behind a pay wall. In any case one source would not be enough and thus this article ought to be deleted. I nominated rather than proposed as I expect it to could be controversial given the recent pattern of COI and POV editing. Jtrrs0 (talk) 19:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Europe,  and United Kingdom. Jtrrs0 (talk) 19:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm pretty sure they've already left the EU? The article badly needs a re-write. The name of this "organization" comes up as a few people want to set up a Brexit museum. Oaktree b (talk) 19:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * An UPE tried to update it but it was so promotional I reverted it all without second thought. Madeline (part of me ) 19:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - The CIB was the institutional successor to the No Campaign in the 1975 EEC referendum. It kept going from then until the 2016 referendum, from the aftermath of the 1975 until UKIP was formed it was probably the major outwardly "leave" pressure group. It's pretty small now but it was an important player in its time. JASpencer (talk) 15:01, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Before nominating it, I imagined this to be the case and that I might be able to find sources to show notability this way, presuming that an older campaign group like this one would have received sufficient independent and reliable coverage. I didn't find anything thus I nominated it. I'd obviously be be happy to re-consider my view if you have any new sources I failed to find. Jtrrs0 (talk) 15:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment. Initial search on Newspapers.com for "Campaign for an Independent Britain" (in quotes) generates 437 matches. Even if the majority of those get thrown out, it seems likely there are a few more in-depth articles in there that confer notability. I can't say this is a priority for me but in case it's helpful, I've clipped a couple of articles from The Telegraph (1996) and The Independent (1997 opinion piece). Cielquiparle (talk) 21:32, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this it is really helpful. I had a look at these two articles and I think they do not themselves qualify, the Telegraph one is trivial in regards to CIB, it essentially notes its existence and that they held a meeting on a particular day in a particular place, but the article really is covering another phenomenon. The opinion piece is a little more borderline regarding whether it is significant coverage but it is clearly unreliable per WP:RSEDITORIAL. This follows a pattern that I have thus far seen for articles, they either trivially name drop CIB or are more borderline but are either non-independent or unreliable. I'll keep trawling through Newspapers.com, though. Thanks again. Jtrrs0 (talk) 12:06, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks JASpencer. We are working on this page and any pointers are gratefully received. JackLions (talk) 10:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "We are working on this page"?? Oh, really.....? And who, pray tell, might "we" be? -- Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  23:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep iteration of the original 1976 Safeguard Britain Campaign, which became the British Anti-Common Market Campaign in 1983 and subsequently the CIB in 1989. Passes the GNG.


 * Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:18, 14 October 2022 (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.