Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democratic National Assembly


 * 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. Merges, if required may be discussed at t/p. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades of Godric On leave 04:46, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Democratic National Assembly

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable. A defunct political party that got less than 500 votes in its one campaign. The "Trinidad Express" references do not work, even on archive.org. Democratic National Alliance (Trinidad and Tobago) may or may not refer to the same organization, but a similar case for deletion applies. Power~enwiki (talk) 03:48, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related page as per nom statement:


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:27, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Trinidad and Tobago-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:27, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Trinidad and Tobago-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:27, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Horrible article, but isn't a party that took part in a national election notable per se? A notable source would be Kind regards, Grueslayer 06:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, a party taking part in national elections is notable in itself. arguments based on number of seats won, are not applicable here when it comes to notability, else we are putting notability in the hands of votes cast rather than the sources which show that clearly this party did exist.Egaoblai (talk) 09:38, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:41, 19 September 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep both pages, per . The nominator suggests these two pages might be about the same organization. The pages themselves both describe a messy process whereby the D.N.Assembly was at one point a part of the D.N.Alliance, but then it pulled out. So the two organizations were not the same.
 * -- Reading these pages further, and following the links in them to other wikipedia pages (what a concept!), reveals that the D.N.Alliance then merged with another party and became the N.D.Alliance, and then this merged with the UNC to form the UNC-Alliance, which won enough seats in the 2007 election (15 out of 41) to become the official opposition.
 * -- Unfortunately the 2005 book suggested by won't help with verification of facts about parties formed in 2006. I don't see a more recent edition on Google Books. -- Gpc62 (talk) 05:40, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * (as nom) I support a merge/redirect to whatever successor party actually won seats in the assembly. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 17:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - We should be keeping all political parties regardless of size or ideology in addition to pages on their leaders and youth sections. This is material that readers have a reason to expect in a comprehensive encyclopedia. File this under the policy of WP:IAR if you wanna: "Use common sense to improve the encyclopedia." Carrite (talk) 02:44, 4 October 2017 (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.