Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Italian Liberal Group (2nd 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. Coverage in reliable sources is required for inclusion in Wikipedia (WP:V, WP:N). The "keep" side here does not only not provide such sources, but they admit that there are none even in Italian. I must therefore discount their opinions.  Sandstein  13:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Italian Liberal Group
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log )

A very small and unknown group of Italian liberal politicians practically irrelevant, I don't see the raison d'être of this page. The creator of the page said it could be improved, but nothing has changed since then, a 2 line page is left because nothing relevant can be added. There are other similar groups in other countries (Liberal International British Group, German Group of the Liberal International, Dutch Group of Liberal International, Canadian Group of Liberal International etc.), none of these have a page on Wikipedia: the only one present on Wikipedia was the Liberal International British Group, whose page was rightly deleted for lack of notability. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 20:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. I am not sure this disussion can actually take place, as there was a similar proposal in April 2020 and the result was keep. Again, this subject has relevance and is quite notable from a historical point of view. For a long time, GLI was was the only member of the Liberal International from Italy. The article should be improved, but definitely kept. However, I am asking administrators to verify whether this discussion is consistent with Wikipedia rules. --Checco (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The procedure is valid, a page can be renominated for deletion afer six months. The last time the page was kept with decidedly weak motivations. It is not enough to be an observer member of a political international to have encyclopedic relevance, first of all an organization should be known. This group is totally unknown, there is no news about it on the web. The page is written in 2 lines and you have not been able to improve it, although you have claimed that it can be improved. I honestly don't see how this group should be maintained on Wikipedia compared to other similar groups, which are probably even more important and organized. Besides being lacking in notoriety, it has practically not carried out any activity that can be considered worthy of note.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 22:29, 3 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. This was and is a member of the Liberal International. I'll admit that the article can and should be expanded upon.--Autospark (talk) 14:13, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Can something be encyclopedic about which there is nothing to say? It is useless for you two to say that the article can be improved if you are unable to do so. There are practically no sources on this group, I looked for them but I did not find them, an article to stay on Wikipedia should be based on independent external sources, in this case there are none. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:44, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * @Checco, @Autospark and everyone: I add that the most absurd thing is that this "group" promotes itself through the Wikipedia page!  On my view an encyclopedic organization would not need to rely on Wikipedia (even worse on a 2 line page). I believe this is something against the principles of Wikipedia itself. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 16:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:18, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. The group doesn't meet the notability requirements. Despite promises of sources that show significant coverage in reliable sources, there are none in the article, and I could find none online. I am open to the fact that there might be some sources in Italian, a language I don't speak - if there are such sources maybe someone would like to show us them? Last AfD was closed via non-admin closure and really shouldn't have been, there weren't enough responses to form a consensus, it should have been relisted. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem is that there are no sources in the Italian language of this group either. However, I hope for further participation in this procedure, it would be strange if a page of a group without sources that promotes itself through the Wikipedia page is kept only because its creator Checco and the user Autospark (who practically always intervenes in his support, through what might seem an implicit alliance between the 2 users on these topics) have expressed themselves in favor of keeping. The mere fact that there are no sources and that it promotes itself through the Wikipedia page would seem to me sufficient for the deletion...--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 01:35, 25 December 2020 (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.