Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HammerSickle


 * 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. DGG's opinion appears to be based on a misreading of the article.  Sandstein  17:42, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

HammerSickle

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Delete Not significant, minor faction that received 3.2% of the vote several years ago; only two sources one of which is from a site affiliated with the group the second of which only mentions the group in passing. Tagged for original research, non-notability and relying on sources close to the subject. Downwoody (talk) 22:30, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 17:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 17:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  — Frankie (talk) 17:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. No significant coverage in reliable independent sources. Fails WP:GNG.--JayJasper (talk) 19:48, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Even 2% of the vote is significant enough. We should have very liberal interpretation of the standards for notability of minor political parties because of the usual bias in coverage, and the ease at which we display our own political feelings that they are unimportant.  DGG ( talk ) 23:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstood, this group did not receive 3.2% of the vote in a general election. They are not a political party and you're incorrect to suggest that they are. They are a tiny faction within a minor political party and received 3.2% of the vote at a meeting of that minor political party! That's probably why there are no independent sources establishing this group's notability. Downwoody (talk) 04:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B  music  ian  03:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Rorshacma (talk) 16:54, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, but move to FalceMartello. This is the name of a publication, rather than an organizational name. The organization dates back to 1983, and has a nationwide presence. --Soman (talk)
 * Delete per nom and JayJasper. As to Soman, there are no sources establishing either the age of the group or its "nationwide presence" and those claims are not asserted in the article. No independent sources establish notability. Vale of Glamorgan (talk) 17:56, 6 May 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.