Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of far-right political parties


 * 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. -- Scott Burley (talk) 01:58, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

List of far-right political parties

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:TNT. This list is an absolute nightmare. For such a controversial list, to have no references at all is appalling. There might not be a need for such a list anyway (it could be a category), but in any case it cannot exist in such a state. StAnselm (talk) 01:04, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Thanks,L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  01:37, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Thanks,L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  01:37, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Every party name on the list is a link to a Wikipedia article. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 02:57, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * But there is no evidence that any are far-right political parties. For example, all the entries in "Australia - current" were wrong. The political parties (e.g. One Nation) were not described by reliable sources as "far right"; the far-right organisations were not political parties. So how can any of the content remain? StAnselm (talk) 03:12, 13 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TNT unless someone wants to clean it up quickly. It is very worrying that there are parties on this list who are not described as far-right in their own articles, let alone have a source verifying that.  If there was a clean version to revert to I would support that, but as it is, it is easier to wipe it out and let someone build up a properly referenced list. SpinningSpark 18:21, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep, I see nothing but fixable issues here. If an article is properly categorized by Category:Far-right political parties or a subcategory thereof (and every article I clicked on in a random sample was so categorized), then it is properly listed here as it's the exact same statement of fact. Given that the nominator themselves implies that the category is fine, and there is not even a suggestion that "far right" is not a meaningful classification such that we should have neither category nor list, deleting this would be an act of laziness ("it's too hard to clean up or maintain") rather than policy-supported. postdlf (talk) 15:43, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * List pages are articles and are therefore not immune from requiring reliable sources. Inclusion in a Wikipedia category most certainly does not amount to verification.  At the very least, the linked article should contain a verifying citation.  It is easily demonstrable that some articles in the category do not even have a claim of being far right in them.  Sure, its fixable, but it's not easy.  Are you volunteering to do it?  It's easier to start again with a list that we can verify.  That's why TNT applies in this case. SpinningSpark 18:11, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have mixed feelings about this. One one hand, deletion is not appropriate as an alternative to just doing the work of copying citations for already-verified claims from other Wikipedia articles. Yes, the ideal is to have a citation for every list item, but those citations are readily available. When you go to challenge material, it's just lazy not to just click to the link first. If the article doesn't verify it, then by all means remove it from the list. If it does, copy over the citation. That said, "far-right" is tricky, and encompasses a lot. Are we looking for any party that a single reliable source has called "far-right"? If they're associated with Nazis or fascists, are they automatically considered far-right? Does that need to be a defining characteristic? IMO this is not about which sources have/haven't been copied into this article, but whether a clear inclusion criteria can be articulated such that this is an appropriate topic for a list regardless of whether every entry has a source. &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 18:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * At the risk of starting to badger, I remind you that this list is 100% unsourced. It is already known that some of the items are inappropriate/dubious.  To clean it up requires it to be 100% checked.  This is much the same as TNT and start over. SpinningSpark 19:43, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * If you want to challenge specific entries, you can do so. It would be lazy to do so without checking the article first, since the presumption should be that it's verified in the article, but if it's not there, remove it. Lots of lists are unsourced because they're predicated on the existence of Wikipedia articles with sources. That's not ideal, and is something to be fixed, so anyone is welcome to WP:SOFIXIT. The list should only be deleted if the subject itself is not appropriate, not because nobody has yet copied over the sources. &mdash; Rhododendrites  <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk \\ 20:35, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. postdlf (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as ORIGINAL RESEARCH due to the undefined, subjective nature of "far right".  It is difficult to see what the Islamic Action Front has in common with the Odriíst National Union, or what ideology the Philippine Falange shares with the European Workers Party.  Which political ideas are regarded as "far right" vary so greatly across time and from country to country tha tit is impossible to fix a definition of "far right parties."E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Far-right, Category:Far-right politics, Category:Far-right political parties... If there is an issue even with whether the term "far-right" is verifiable, that needs to be a broader discussion than just the fate of one index of articles as we have here. Keep in mind too that so long as it's reliable sources applying that classification, and not editors, then it is not OR, and your disagreement with those sources is not relevant. Your complaint even seems to attack the very idea of political spectrum classifications, which is even less germane here. postdlf (talk) 22:39, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Category:Political parties by ideology make sense. Category:Fascist parties, Category:Monarchist parties or Labour parties make sense.    But this list is arbitrary because of the lack of definition of "far-right".  E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:20, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 03:23, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as unworkable. For those pointing to Category:Far-right political parties, compare Category:Far-right politics by country, which then is divided into categories for each country and has many more parties in these categories than Category:Far-right political parties. It is these categories, I think, that were used to inform the creation of this article. Yet the state of the article is horrid. The lack of sourcing for these hundreds of items is not something that should be ignored, and indeed some of the parties I clicked on are not reliably described as far-right within their own articles, so it is dubious if sources could be found for all of the parties in the list. So therefore, we have several dilemmas:
 * Category:Far-right political parties seems to be woefully underdeveloped compared to Category:Far-right politics by country and its subcategories.
 * There exists a Category:Far-right political parties by country‎, but it is also underdeveloped. For example, Category:Far-right politics in Mexico‎ contains several political parties, but Category:Far-right political parties in Mexico does not exist.
 * The list at the center of this AFD is completely unsourced.
 * The inclusion of articles in the aforementioned categories may also be unsourced.
 * So delete the subject of this AFD per nom, but something may have to be done about these categories.  Pinguinn     🐧   06:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Question. Do we have a list of left wing or Centre political parties? --Comment by  Selfie City  ( talk about my  contributions ) 20:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete It is easy to find sources to label anybody as "far right" and that's why this list can never serve the purpose of encyclopedia.  M L talk 09:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.