Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Jersey Conservative Party


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 10:43, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

New Jersey Conservative Party

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article does not have any real sourcing and there is no evidence that this state party has any elected officers or that it been mentioned in a non-trivial way in reliable sources. It is also defunct. Toa Nidhiki05 01:43, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep Does not appear to be defunct. 10,610 members as of February 2019 (https://www.state.nj.us/state/elections/assets/pdf/svrs-reports/2019/2019-03-voter-registration-by-county.pdf.) Djflem (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep User:Djflem has done a great job of updating the article and adding sources, i think it is worth to keep the article! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 10:54, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment While the article appears to be improved on the surface, I don’t think the sources added qualify as significant, non-trivial coverage. Most of them are the number of registered voters - which is an acknowledgement that a party exists, not significant coverage - as well as several sources for lawsuits filed by the party. However, they are not independent coverage, but public records of the filed lawsuits. Sources 21 and 22 are press releases of the party - self-published sources. There are a few articles from the New York Times covering it as a local matter and more of an oddity than anything, but I don’t think those qualify - and regardless, there’s been no coverage since the 1996 election, where they failed to elect any candidates and received only a small percentage of the vote. I just don’t think this qualifies as substantial, non-trivial coverage: the reporting was more so on the quixotic nature of third parties in general imo. Toa Nidhiki05 15:13, 12 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep I'm finding tons more information about this party (which I previously had never heard of) via Newspapers.com. This topic is proving to meet GNG. I'm including relevant histories and references now... those interested in building the page may find additional information in the free access clippings I'm adding to all my references. S EMMENDINGER  ( talk ) 02:13, 16 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.