Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eight Party Alliance


 * 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 Redirected to Seven Party Alliance, editors are encouraged to merge as appropriate. Pastordavid (talk) 19:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Eight Party Alliance

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This page doesn't seem to have a purpose beyond attacking the parties involved, and in any case, the term Eight Party Alliance is very rarely used - the term Seven Party Alliance is used even when including the Maoists BovineBeast (talk) 14:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment, I'm wary about deleting a page like this which isn't vanity... but the only Eight Party Alliance references I'm finding are in relation to Bangladesh. gren グレン`
 * The eight parties in question are the governing parties of Nepal, but the normal term is Seven Party Alliance, and the article prior to nomination was essentially simply an attack on the alliance BovineBeast (talk) 22:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, the attack bit was easily fixed, then? It's still a decent stub. --Dhartung | Talk 04:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Especially since it's not the normal term, I doubt it can grow beyond that stub. Perhaps on reflection we should Merge it with Seven Party Alliance, since that page doesn't contain any note of the fact that it includes the Maoists these days. BovineBeast (talk) 11:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, "decent stub"—there's an oxymoron. – thedemonhog   talk  •  edits  05:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, less formal use than Seven Party Alliance but reliable sources do use the term. Economist The Hindu etc. --Dhartung | Talk 21:13, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete unlses somebody decides to source this article.  Yahel  Guhan  05:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hers fold  (t/a/c) 20:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nepal-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge & Redirect If this term has been used in some sources, then the obvious thing to do is a redirect with an explanation DGG (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2008 (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.