Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libertarian Party UK


 * 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. Tone 10:56, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Libertarian Party UK

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Previously deleted as Articles for deletion/Libertarian Party (United Kingdom), restored and expanded but still fails to have any significant press coverage meeting wp:source requirements. Its 182 votes in United Kingdom general election, 2010 were below many Independents. JRPG (talk) 15:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * More info on why it fails wp:notability on the talk page. JRPG (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  —JRPG (talk) 17:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete No more notable now as it was when it was deleted the first time. Sourcing is still a problem. More than half of the cites that still exist refer back to their own web site. Other coverage cited only shows that it exists. Only the two interviews linked rise to the level of "significant coverage". Even then, a party of less than 500 in a nation of 62 million will need something far more significant than that. DarkAudit (talk) 05:52, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as above. Still seems to be zero coverage outside of its own website, and Wikipedia is not a place to recite other people's manifestoes for them. The candidate for Norwich North might warrant some sort of mention if he really is the youngest candidate for Parliament, but that claim will need verifying by someone other than the party that fielded him. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 14:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * A reliable source has now been provided to verify the claim that the candidate for Norwich North is the youngest candidate for Parliament. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.1.75 (talk) 15:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * If you mean the BBC Norwich article, that only says he's the youngest candidate in this by-election. Even if you did verify this claim, it would, at most, get a mention in the Norwich North By-election article. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 15:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete What we look for are multiple reliable published sources, such as books and newspapers, that are independent of and have written substantially about the subject, here the Libertarian Party, which would demonstrate that the general inclusion criteria for an article in the encyclopedia is met. There is the only one reliable published source that I can see, the politics.co.uk one; the remainder are the Party website, press releases by the Party, blogs, and trivial mentions in various places. The subject does not seem to me to meet the guidelines for an article at this time. No objections to an article being written sometime in the future drawing on multiple reliable published sources. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet the criteria for inclusion, per the arguments already presented here  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 05:33, 31 December 2010 (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.