Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democratic Freedom Caucus (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 delete. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:56, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Democratic Freedom Caucus
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article almost exclusively links to the organization’s own web page and does not appear to have any elected officers at any level of government. Toa Nidhiki05 19:15, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep – a lot of water has gone over the bridge since this topic was deleted in 2006. E.g., a check on references does provide enough WP:RS to establish Notability. (And I wonder how getting "elected officers" is a criteria for notability.) – S. Rich (talk) 20:09, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - Which sources are you referring to? Every source except for three go to the website for the organization, while the other three go to what appear to be internet blogs. There aren’t any notable members other than a former county councilman in St. Louis County, which is an extremely low bar. There’s very little to indicate this organization is even remotely notable. Toa Nidhiki05 20:46, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Because I had never heard of it, and sourcing on page is almost all PRIMARY, I ran some searches.  But very little came up, and most of the handful of hits were mere mentions. If someone can source it properly, feel free to ping me to reconsider.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Article mainly contains partisan sources. --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 00:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC); edited 05:30, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Libertarianism-related deletion discussions. &#8211;  MJL &thinsp;‐Talk‐☖ 14:59, 15 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep I see no justifiable reason to delete this article.  Just because most Americans have never heard of it doesn't mean we should delete the article.  Most Americans have never heard of James K. Polk either ... Necropolis Hill (talk) 02:20, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
 * - this isn't actually a reason (or certainly no more than an ILIKEIT reason). Articles don't have a presumption of retention - !votes need to demonstrate a reason. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:45, 26 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep The nominator seems to have an agenda--he not only has several conservative userboxes on his userpage, he has a pattern of editing Wikipedia in ways that reflect a partisan bias. Take a look at his contributions. The Democratic Freedom Caucus just seems to be his most recent political target since moving on from Ilhan Omar. If deletion is to be considered, that process shouldn't be initiated by someone whose motives are so clearly questionable. But the group is notable enough to have entries in politics-specific wikis, including an in-depth entry at Daily Kos's wiki http://www.dkosopedia.com/static/d/e/m/Democratic_Freedom_Caucus_f8c6.html. 2600:100D:B10C:D47E:1BB8:B5CE:54B0:3F (talk) 05:54, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note This is the first edit this IP has made. Toa <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 16:20, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note True. But does it matter? Anyone can easily check for themselves. For whatever reason, Nidhiki05 decided not to say anything that actually addresses the points (not even to deny them!), but instead focuses on this. 2600:100D:B165:1AC7:8CFC:CB0:8C78:F9A1 (talk) 01:31, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note This is this IP’s first edit too, and I don’t respond to unfounded personal attacks. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 02:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note Yes, there's not much of a point in creating an account given how rarely I edit, and I'm using a cellular connection without a static IP. You've proposed to delete a page that's been on Wikipedia for almost a decade, so it's appropriate for people to ask why this process has been started in the first place. Others can consider the points I mentioned, look into them, and make up their own minds about whether the concerns are unfounded or not. 2600:100D:B15F:E6BA:8C7A:990:2577:30B8 (talk) 03:02, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

‘’’NOTE’’’The guy proposing this for deletion is trying to remove references to Libertarian Democrats on Wikipedia. He previously deleted referenced material about them on the Party’s Wikipedia page and claimed that they aren’t notable.Necropolis Hill (talk) 14:06, 18 March 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.
 * Reply - Incorrect. I removed your addition of this organization as a faction on the Democratic Party page, which has been rejected before. This time, I looked at the page and noticed this particular organization doesn’t meet the standard for notability and had previously been deleted for that reason. I’ve made no other edits on the subject of libertarian Democrats AFAIK. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 15:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete There is no coverage of this organization in mainstream media hence it lacks notability. TFD (talk) 16:29, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 *  Possible keep - I saw some references to it in Google News. But if not then let's look at redirecting the page to Libertarian Democrat or something. The history of this article can then be preserved. Karl Twist (talk) 12:05, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - not enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to show it passes WP:GNG or WP:ORGDEPTH.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 14:34, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ––<b style="color:#3399FF">Redditaddict69</b> <sup style="color:#339900">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(contribs)  19:54, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete this advertisement. Trillfendi (talk) 20:20, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, due to some new info and the fact that Democrat Mike Bozarth has been elected to the St. Joseph city council, I would strengthen by vote of Possible keep to a Keep. Karl Twist (talk) 10:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment It’s worth noting that Mike Bozarth was elected to one term nearly ten years agao (2006-2010) and is deceased. <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Toa</i> <i style="color: green; font-family: Mistral;">Nidhiki05</i> 12:13, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Reply - Yes Mike Bozarth has passed away all those years ago. I still stand by my changing of Possible keep to Keep. Actually he may have passed away in 2015 which is 4 years ago. See News-PressNOW.com, Oct. 14, 2015 - Liberty movement lost a friend He must have passed away not long after he received the Karl Wetzel Award for Lifetime Achievement for his over thirty years of activism in support of the Libertarian Party. See I ndependent Political Report' - Missouri LP 2015 State Convention Wrap Up, New Officers Elected By Cisse Spragins, Immediate Past Chair So he's worth noting. Thanks Karl Twist (talk) 12:52, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - Have a look at the sourcing. -- Somedifferentstuff (talk) 11:09, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete promotional article, fails WP:GNG (and not sure if WP:NORG applies but that too.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SportingFlyer (talk • contribs) 01.33, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment to the above. It's not a promotional article! It just needs a lot more work on it. Karl Twist (talk) 08:34, 25 March 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.