Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Non violent direct action in Australia


 * 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 article has been speedily deleted. It was unambiguous promotion, both for an organisation and for a book. There may or may not be a good article on this topic waiting to be written, but this coatrack was not it. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Non violent direct action in Australia

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )


 * Delete unless the article is going to be substantially expanded. As it currently stands it does not do the topic any justice and I suspect that it will not go any further. It seems to be used as a promotional vehicle for an Aiden Ricketts publication. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 07:45, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Looks very promotional, unlikely to be expanded to an all encompassing article. If it is we can address the issue again then.


 * Keep I am writing as the author of the contribution. The article is meant to be read in the context of the whole entry on non violent direct action and follows an entry on non violent direct action in the UK. It is a first start at beginning an entry on NVDA in Australia that i would expect to see grow over time, both from my own and others contributions. It could be expanded to include further sources other than the sources currently featured. It is true that it is a small entry about a single organisation, but it is also the case that the North East Forest Alliance is probably the most significant and successful proponent of NVDA in Australia and one of the most studied. My aim in citing the sources I have cited is to make an initial entry using sources that are readily available to me and that are at least existing publications. I would need time to develop it more extensively as a referenced article citing wider sources but this is eminently possible as NEFA has been the subject of study by a number of authors. I would suggest keeping the entry on the basis that it is is likely to be expanded in the near future into a more fully rounded article that is likely to include a range of sources and refer to more recent organisations that have taken on the mantle of non violent direct action in Australia. Australia has a unique contribution to make in any discussion of NVDA because environmental protest in Australia has been prominent in the use and further development of this tactic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Activ9 (talk • contribs)


 * There is a lot of work needed before it should be an actual article. From an environmental activism perspective alone you have the include the Franklin Dam controversy, old growth logging in Gippsland, the Gunns 20, logging in Tasmanian etc. I suggest it is done in project or user namespace. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:56, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs)


 * Delete - A vast topic (every strike, every boycott, every protest, etc. in the entire history of Australia which did not end in violence is technically "Non violent direct action in Australia.") We have here instead a small, scantly sourced piece on a single event. I hope the content creator isn't discouraged, but this is a case of the content not coming within 100 miles of living up to the title. That content which is there, even if properly titled, needs far more in the way of sourcing. Try making small, incremental improvements to already existing articles working from published sources to get the feel of WP writing, it seems like an attempt to jump into the deep end of the pool before the rudiments of swimming are mastered. Carrite (talk) 05:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Non-violent direct action's set of strategems, of which not doing violence is only a small part, is always changing and adapting to new counter-strategies, making the focus of this article considerably narrower than Carrite suggests. Anarchangel (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2012 (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.