Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Revolutionary Socialist Party candidates in the Indian general election, 2014


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:16, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

List of Revolutionary Socialist Party candidates in the Indian general election, 2014

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Revolutionary Socialist Party (India) is a state level party. It had only fielded 6 candidates in the elections. Previously the list of AAP candidates was also deleted, though it had fielded large number of candidates.Skr15081997 (talk) 07:27, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 08:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 08:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 08:22, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. RSP is a recognized state party, with national presence. I would oppose using the AAP deletion argument here, the AAP deletion was done in a different context, with a lot of cyberwarriors trying to push an agenda to portray AAP as a contender for government. This article could possibly be renamed to "RSP in the Indian general election, 2014" or something similar, but I named it to be in line with other articles of parties contesting the election. The RSP definately attracted attention in the election, especially around the controversy of moving from LDF to UDF in Kerala. --Soman (talk) 08:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete: Can't see any notability in the list. Whatever little useful info; that is basically stats of wins/losses can be added in Revolutionary_Socialist_Party_(India). §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 08:58, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * RSP gathered 1.6 million votes in the 2014 election, so to say that it's intervention in the 2014 election lacks notability becomes a bit odd. Also, the article could now be expanded with the results, which were not available when the article was created. --Soman (talk) 15:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thats 0.3% and one person of the six fielded won a seat out of 543. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 18:20, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * You have many countries with a smaller population than 1.6 million. Notability is not only measured towards the Indian national polity. --Soman (talk) 22:10, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Notability is always a comparative measure and what you compare it with is important. Above that, quantity of votes or quantity of candidates that won or even the quantity of candidates that stood up doesn't matter. You would have to convince us on how a list of these candidates (which actually is not even a list as of now) should be an independent article. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 03:55, 21 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete While the recording of parties' candidates is a valid encyclopaedic task, this particular article has several problems. For a start, it is misnmaed - it is not a list but an article. As a pure list - six names, in one electio - it's pointless and better merged as a list into Revolutionary Socialist Party (India). But, as it stands, it is not sufficiently important to warrant an article. I can see a place for an article Revolutionary Socialist Party election results or similar, covering the full history of the party and clearly linked as a branch from the main article - such pages exist for many other parties - but a page detailing just six candidates in one elction is too much. Emeraude (talk) 16:11, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete purely out of principle - this is not a list.-- Laun  chba  ller  09:38, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, the article is now moved (no longer containing the word 'list' in the title). The article is expanded, and the electoral participation of a parliamentary party is clearly notable. --Soman (talk) 19:29, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per Emeraude article is well sourced enough, but a relatively minor party doesn't warrant an independent article any more than similar Libertarian candidates do. ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ 話 ♪  ߷  ♀ 投稿 ♀ 11:47, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, @User:Solarra, first of all, US and Indian politics differ. RSP is a party that has had national parliamentary representation for decades and participated in many state-level cabinets, thus the comparison with the U.S. Libertarian Party doesn't hold. In this particular election the party got a very weak result, compared its history, but it is not an irrelevant actor in Indian politics. And for what it's worth, we actually do have some articles on U.S. Liberatarian presidential campaigns. Wikipedia isn't paper and our key problem here isn't that it is flooded with well-sourced material from the global south. The 2014 Indian general election was the largest election in human history, it would be quite natural to have plenty of different articles about the role of the different parties in the fray. --Soman (talk) 12:08, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, I understand the fundamental differences here, but they are still a minority party.  That being said, the material in the article certainly warrants a place on Wikipedia, just not in its own article, but as part of a broad overview of the elections themselves.  ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ 話 ♪  ߷  ♀ 投稿 ♀ 12:27, 31 May 2014 (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.