Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International League for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International (3rd 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Article can always be recreated if more in-depth coverage in reliable sourcing is located. —Ganesha811 (talk) 18:18, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

International League for the Reconstruction of the Fourth International
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Another obscure Trotskyist international, this one almost entirely associated with its founder Michel Varga. The article cites Robert J. Alexander's book twice: both of which are passing mentions, one in a section about the International Committee of the Fourth International and another which refers to it simply as the "Varga Fourth International". Alexander himself says that the makeup of the organization was unclear and that little is known about the groups that were affiliated with it. A search on Google Scholar yields only two results, one of which is a mirror of a Swedish Wikipedia page, the other is a Czech PhD dissertation that only references it once in a long list of Trotskyist internationals. There's not much on its French name either.

As this organisation apparently has no significant coverage in reliable sources, and as Alexander seems to imply that its notability is inherited entirely from its founder, I recommend that this article be deleted. Grnrchst (talk) 13:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  13:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics,  and France. Grnrchst (talk) 13:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - last time this was listed for deletion, Soman found a long list of French works which mention the international. Unfortunately there was no analysis of whether they were significant mentions, but from what I can tell it does seem to have significant coverage in Benjamin Stora's La dernière génération d'octobre, a shorter mention in Pierre Turpin's Le trotskysme aujourd'hui, and it appears in the index of the Dictionnaire de la politique française and so presumably in one of the volumes which isn't on Google Books.  There are some other hits in books with no previews, but I reckon that's enough for an article. Warofdreams talk 20:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
 * The lack of analysis was definitely an issue, because going through some of these now, it seems that most instances are only passing mentions and it appears there may have been false positives in others as well. Looking at Stora's book, the International League gets one single passing mention in a larger section about Varga, Turpin's book doesn't give much detail at all. To be clear, I'm not saying there isn't coverage of this organisation, but I still doubt there is significant coverage. It seems that most of the mentions of International League occur when discussing Varga himself, there don't appear to be any that consider the organisation as an entity independently notable of its founder.
 * Of what I've seen in English and French sources, the information we could glean specifically on the organisation would never grow larger than a stub. --Grnrchst (talk) 08:30, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete – Per nom. Of course books about Trotskyism and political dictionaries are going to have passing mentions of this organisation, because that's within their scope. However, is this subject within Wikipedia's scope? I'd also argue no, as despite being around for nearly 18 years, this article still lacks significant coverage in reliable sources, probably because there are none. I find the slightly different argument in the previous second deletion nomination to be non-sensical; Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia and should not have an article for everything that exists with a name to it. Yue 🌙 17:17, 7 July 2024 (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.