Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of frivolous political parties 2


 * 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 keep. --Core desat 04:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

List of frivolous political parties
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Mostly redundant to Category:Joke political parties Will (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - clearly not at all redundant with the category. The list provides two significant advantages - firstly, the list entries provide information above and beyond the cateogory (since it's sorted by where the party was located, not just alphabetically - additionally, it contains other information a category can't, like whether a party is still active) and secondly, it contains redlinks to encourage develop of relevant future articles.  There's also some content at the bottom of the list which discusses the phenomena in fiction, which isn't appropriate for a category at all. Wily D  17:32, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Then the list of fictional parties should be in the main article. (That, and I'm in half a mind to add Election Night Special to the category). Will (talk) 17:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe it should be, but the "organisation by country" feature is one of the prime reasons for a list per WP:LIST Wily D 17:55, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, lists and categories are both acceptable ways of grouping and navigating articles. They are complementary rather than redundant (see also Categories, lists, and series boxes). These articles have an obvious connection and therefore a list is fully appropriate. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 18:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, didn't we just go through this a few months ago? Do we have to keep on having this debate again and again?  Zsero 20:10, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - per reasons given Reginmund 22:24, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. List is not redundant, as it provides more information than a category could. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 23:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep for all the reasons given above. --Bduke 01:05, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons listed above. ajdlinux | utc 07:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Structured lists providing more info than a category as per WP:LIST. Davewild 08:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep One of the great things about living in a democracy is the right to be frivolous. Mandsford 00:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, significant feature. --Soman 11:39, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Can we get a Speedy Keep over here in the circumstances, or is there any particular point in that any more? Mind, I'm impressed by the way this discussion has stuck to the nominator's claim and not erupted in a rematch over whether we should nuke the whole subject. Thanks, folks. --Kizor 12:21, 31 July 2007 (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.