Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modification of Political Parties Under the Restoration


 * 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 of the debate was '''no consensus; keep. I'll list it on cleanup.'''. Johnleemk | Talk 13:29, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Modification of Political Parties Under the Restoration
This page feels like utter nonsense. If it can be cleaned up, great, but there's inconsistencies (House of Commons AND French references AND US political parties) and no sources, no hard references, not linked, etc Jcbarr 16:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * If this is not nonsense, then it urgently requires the provision of context and clarity. Strong delete unless verified. -- SockpuppetSamuelson 08:52, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep but rewrite. Needs copyedit, sources, context, move to different title. Seems to be a legitimate topic about French history, maybe a poor translation from a French source? Lukas 09:21, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite. I recognize the language as following the restoration of the English/Scottish monarchy in 1660, but this addresses the English parliament only.  It's a worthwhile topic insofar as the Whig party was born during this period.  Jtmichcock 04:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Not sure I buy that. Too many links to French folks.  And references to 1800s, not 17th century. If we can't figure out what the page is even about, don't see how anyone can fix it.  -Jcbarr 04:41, 12 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's not about the restoration of the Stuarts in Britain in the 17th century, but rather France in the 19th century. But it's incoherent, and does not provide a basis for revision or expansion. A good article on French politics after the Bourbon restoration would not have this name, anyway.  MayerG 08:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. rather then specutlate about what the article means, why don't you ask the user who wrote it? invite that person into this discussion. Kingturtle 19:34, 15 January 2006 (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.