Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Zealand Public 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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

New Zealand Public Party

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A week old unregistered political party that is yet to contest an election. Not meeting WP:GNG currently. Maybe notable in the future but at the moment I doubt on the notability. Hitro talk 06:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Hitro talk 06:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Hitro talk 06:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete This is an extremely fringe group with extreme fringe ideas and no sign of impact at this point. Things could change, but 1 week that does not include an actual election is not long enough to make a party notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:56, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep There's an election in 3 months, and it will soon become apparent if it is registered, runs candidates, or gains significant media coverage. If it doesn't, then it can be deleted in the usual post-election cull.--IdiotSavant (talk) 22:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Equally, we can delete it now, and not recreate it when they don't do any of those things. Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 00:13, 20 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Draftify and only allow it to be created if/when it shows some notability. --Micky (talk) 18:07, 20 June 2020 (UTC) Blocked sockpuppet Malcolmxl5 (talk) 03:20, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Thanks everyone for your comments. Based on this discussion it seems the main issue is WP:SUSTAINED, which requires that "notable topics have attracted attention over a sufficiently significant period of time", which this has not. I'm not swayed by the idea that an subject can have an article because it might become notable. Hence I'm proposing delete on my own article. I'd add one more comment though; the article Tea Party New Zealand is in a very similar situation to this article; if this article is deleted, the Tea Party article should be considered as well. HenryCrun15 (talk) 23:38, 20 June 2020 (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.