Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of syncretic 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 no consensus. The keep arguments are pretty shaky. Merge seems like a better case, but the overall division of participation makes it hard to call that a consensus. Perhaps a separate merge discussion would be a good next step? RL0919 (talk) 13:52, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

List of syncretic political parties

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This is a list of so-called "syncretic political parties". Syncretic politics is a notable topic but this list appears to be OR as I don’t find any authoritative source that defines which parties should be included in it.. Mccapra (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 23:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Syncretic politics is a notable area of academic research, that does not mean there are syncretic political parties. Parties (movements, institutions) may deploy syncretic strategies, but I'm not aware of and can similarly see no peer-reviewed research which examines the notion of syncretic political parties. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 00:04, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, per the same reason as stated on Articles for deletion/List of big tent political parties. -AndreyKva (talk) 01:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * note: That AfD concluded with deletion Mccapra (talk) 16:42, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   12:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   22:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The articles linked to show in the infoboxes their "Political position".  D r e a m Focus  01:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, for the reasons mentioned above. Archives908 (talk) 02:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I think basing a list article on what Wikipedia editors have decided to put into an info box is pretty shaky. There are plenty of RIS that will describe a party as “left-wing”, “centre-right” or so on, and most parties self-describe in such terms. Which parties describe themselves as “syncretic”? Which parties are regularly described as such by RIS? the term is an encyclopedist’s summation rather than a defining characteristic. The sources have been copied from the infoboxes of the original articles, which makes it easier to see the problem. Argentina: Renewal Front - two sources, neither of which uses the term “syncretic” at all. The term is a conclusion drawn by a Wikipedia editor from statements made in those sources. Australia: Democratic Labour Party - ditto. Czech Republic: ANO 2011 the source describes it as “ centrist and populist party based on liberalism and spectral-syncretic politics”. Is this a sound basis for listing it in an encyclopedia as “a syncretic party”? Finland: Crystal Party. The source does not describe the party as syncretic, this is the conclusion of a Wikipedia editor. Romania: Social Democratic Party - the source is an article entitled “ Pragmatism is a winner for “Romanian Left” (emphasis mine) that does not use the term syncretic. Again, this is the inference drawn by Wikipedia editor. So this article seems to me to be a list of inferences by other Wikipedia editors and passing mentions. Mccapra (talk) 05:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Syncretic politics. List article does not meet WP:NLIST and having a separate list article increases the risk of WP:FORK. There are no logistical issues with incorporating the list into the parent article. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – AssumeGoodWraith  (talk | contribs) 11:08, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge to Syncretic politics per MrsSnoozyTurtle. There's zero reason the list can't just be in the main article. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 * It’s not a valid list, IMV, and therefore should not be merged. Mccapra (talk) 08:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.