Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Interlibertarians


 * 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. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 19:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Interlibertarians

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

I see no signs of notability here; the only third party reference is, and it is just a reprint of their manifesto, written by one of their governing body.  DGG ( talk ) 16:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * DGG is ignoring as a third party reference.  Thus, there are two third party references on the topic.  Also, this reference:, despite not being a news source, does state that there will be a 2012 Interlibertarians conference, so they have not discontinued their meetings.   Gold   Standard  20:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I have read the article. I consider it a press release, and furthermore not significant coverage. All it does is announce the existence of the meeting and give a link to their web site. Existence is not notability.  DGG ( talk ) 17:07, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It does not just announce the existence of the meeting. Read the translation [http://translate.google.com/#auto/en/LUGANO%20-%20Si%20terrà%20questo%20fine%20settimana%20presso%20il%20Palazzo%20dei%20Congressi%20%22Interlibertarians%202011%22.%20La%20manifestazione%2C%20un%20unicum%20nel%20suo%20genere%2C%20vuole%20essere%20%22la%20prima%20conferenza%20internazionale%20dei%20partiti%2C%20delle%20associazioni%20e%20dei%20movimenti%20libertari%2C%20un’occasione%20importante%20per%20incontrare%20le%20principali%20organizzazioni%20internazionali%20di%20libero%20mercato%2C%20liberali%20classiche%2C%20miniarchiche%2C%20liberiste%2C%20%20anarco-capitaliste%20%20presenti%20nel%20mondo%20%20per%20un%20dibattito%20serio%20sui%20problemi%20reali%20che%20interessano%20e%20%20che%20affliggono%20il%20mondo%20oggi%2C%20in%20una%20prospettiva%20di%20libertà%20libertaria%22.%0D%0A%0D%0ANelle%20intenzioni%20degli%20organizzatori%20l'evento%2C%20che%20ha%20per%20simbolo%20la%20statua%20della%20libertà%20che%20impugna%20la%20balestra%20di%20Guglielmo%20Tell%2C%20avrà%20cadenza%20annuale%20e%20per%20due%20giorni%2C%20il%20primo%20dedicato%20agli%20interventi%20dei%20rappresentanti%20dei%20partiti%20e%20dei%20movimenti%20presenti%20e%20il%20secondo%20al%20dibattito%2C%20farà%20di%20Lugano%20%22la%20capitale%20mondiale%20della%20libertà%22.%0D%0A%0D%0ANumerosi%20e%20prestigiosi%20relatori%20si%20alterneranno%20sul%20palco%20del%20Palazzo%20dei%20Congressi%20nella%20giornata%20di%20sabato%2C%20mentre%20la%20mattinata%20di%20domenica%20sarà%20dedicata%20al%20dibattito.%20E'%20previsto%20inoltre%20un%20collegamento%20via%20web%20con%20il%20rappresentante%20del%20Libertarian%20Party%20statunitense.%20Per%20maggiori%20informazioni%20consultare%20il%20sito%20www.interlibertarians.org%20o%20scaricare%20il%20programma%20dell'evento. here], it describes what the meeting is about, along with other information about the organization.  Thus, it constitutes valid third party coverage.   Gold   Standard  17:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Two third party references doesn't demonstrate notability. Nwlaw63 (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Could you please point out where at WP:GNG it states that two third-party sources is insufficient? Gold   Standard  21:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * "The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally expected." This particular article has one very brief article in a local newspaper, a brief reprint of the organization's manifesto, and that's it. This isn't even the ballpark of notability, IMO. Nwlaw63 (talk) 00:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * They are expected, but not required. IMO, the three-paragraph local newspaper article at least gets this into the ballpark of notability.  This certainly isn't a no-name garage band.   Gold   Standard  03:44, 7 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep per above, has multiple, third-party news references.  Gold   Standard  23:07, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep for now Hard to evaluate an article in English Wikipedia where all but one of the references are not in English. WP:notability is probably established, and real-world notability looks likely. The content of this stub is OK for a stub. North8000 (talk) 22:40, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as I said in talk page, IL did not receive a notable 3rd party coverage. moreover, if you can read Italian, you can see on their website that the edition 2012 of IL did not take place for lack of fundings (they sold only 60 pins on 1000 they needed). So, this is just a group that did just 1 convention and NOTHING MORE. --Louisbeta (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Notability is not temporary, and since this organization received significant third-party coverage for its first meeting, it is notable.  Gold   Standard  17:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:1E. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In fact, it's not temporany, but it must BE sometime. When and where you can see the significat coverage?--Louisbeta (talk) 06:55, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * When: Interlibertarians 2011 Where: TicinoLive and Tio.ch Gold   Standard  17:11, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your sincere answer. TicinoLive and Tio.ch are surely a significant media coverage.--Louisbeta (talk) 06:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. "Keep for now" makes no sense. Italian sources are not that hard to evaluate (eastern sources are often hard for westerners), and keeping an article as a stub just because it might be notable is not valid.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:37, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Bearian (talk) 18:41, 7 August 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.