Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Occitan Republican Left


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:29, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Occitan Republican Left

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested WP:PROD. Proposed deletion reason was "A very recent local (some 7,000 inhabitants!) section of a larger party? How is this notable?." ProD removed because "I assume that both your proposal and rationale are far from being serious". However, the party was founded in 2008, has no representatives (will cmpete in the 2011 elections), is only active in the Val d'Aran, which has some 7,000 inhabitants... So this is a local, recent party without any electoral success so far, without any notable members, and without any reliable independent sources apart from one (now no longer accessible) local article from before they were even founded. That the article has two interwiki links is in this context irrelevant, Wikipedia article are not reliable sources and don't count towards notability. The fact that also the unreliable sources are extremely limited is an indicator of the small scale and lack of notability of this party as well. Fram (talk) 13:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Aranese parties, acting practically (or on "pacts") with Catalonian parties are considered at least nominally as separate structures, which has been the case for UA for about 30 years. I can't understand what makes the case of ERO distinguishable in this sense. Furthermore, the politics of Aran had been dominated by two parties and ERO was founded as the sole political force with the claim for a breakthrough in many years. This is yet another rationale for notability. Besides, two sister Wikipedias that may be considered referential for notability (ie. Catalan and Occitan) maintain corresponding articles. Additionally, as for the argument "is only active in the Val d'Aran, which has some 7,000 inhabitants...", well, Aranese parties are expected to be active in Val d'Aran, as a matter of fact. Behemoth (talk) 13:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, Aranese parties are active in Val d'Aran, but this is a very small region, which may not be immediately apparent to a casual reader of the article or this AfD, and is quite relevant (parties which are only active in such a small region have generally much less chance of being notable). As to why the ERO is distinguishable from e.g. the Unity of Aran: the latter has been active much longer, and has won seats in elections. It may still be a non notable organisation, I haven't checked this any further, but it certainly has a stronger claim than the ERO. Fram (talk) 14:05, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I guess you're ignoring Val d'Aran's sui generis position in Catalonia and the relevant political scene. Behemoth (talk) 14:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Since these have no impact on the notability as defined on Wikipedia, yes, I am ignoring them, just like apparently every reliable publication in Spain / Catalonia. Fram (talk) 14:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Question Am I correct in interpreting the article to mean that this is a political party that hasn't (yet) participated in an election? Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's how I read it as well. Fram (talk) 14:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, for an Aranese party founded in 2008, the next election to participate shall naturally be the upcoming General Council elections in 2011. Behemoth (talk) 14:34, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not all political parties participate in elections. Carrite (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm not totally convinced that a political party operating exclusively in a locality of 7,000 people is notable, much less a brand-new party that hasn't even run in (much less won) an election yet. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Can we then assume that what makes a political party notable is essentially the population of the locality it operates in? Is a Chinese political party more likely to be notable than, say, an American or Belgian one? Behemoth (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, we can't. We can assume that e.g. a party that operates nationally has more chance of being notable than a party that operates locally, but what in the end makes a party notable for the purposes of Wikipedia is what is described in WP:N: in general, indepth, sustained coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources. Everything else may be indicative of notability or the lack thereof, but is not sufficient on its own. Fram (talk) 20:29, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - The lowest of all barriers for inclusion of political parties and their leaders. If it exists, it should be covered with a Wikipedia article. Notable per se. Carrite (talk) 15:39, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:ITEXISTS? Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  16:20, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Inherent notability. See: Secondary schools, major highways, towns, major transportation companies, etc. Carrite (talk) 18:31, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Everyone can start a political party, and many of them have zero impact, unlike schools, highways, towns, ... And even all these categories, with the exception of towns, have still to provide evidence of their notability. Fram (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What makes you think that "everyone" can start a political party? Is your presumption universally verified by relevant legislation of various states and subnational entities? Behemoth (talk) 20:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Everyone can start a political party, at least in democracies. Not every political party will be able to or allowed to participate in elections though. But even that is generally a small hurdle. Apart from that, while you are free to nitpick other people's arguments, it would perhaps be more fruitful if you brought forwards some arguments that would to establish the notability of the party, instead of claiming some inherent notability (which is, per WP:ORG, not a reliaty on Wikipedia). Fram (talk) 20:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry. Are you trying to teach me how to behave? Behemoth (talk) 04:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I am trying to indicate what kind of arguments and discussion are probably more useful in trying to convince other people that this article should be kept. You are free to continue this discussion any way you like it, but I am free to point out that I don't believe this to be useful. Fram (talk) 06:48, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And that's what makes supposed inherent notability tricky, if it's to be assumed at all it must be done considering all factors. "All towns are notable" sounds like an almost inarguably true statement, but what about a child's milk-carton 'town'?  By the same token, "All political parties are notable" appears to make sense at first, but surely doesn't apply to a party confined to a small local area, with no candidates in office and not even having participated in an election yet. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  22:19, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep there seem to be sources, which is sufficient. That the sphere of action is a mall region does not prevent notability .    DGG ( talk ) 18:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * A press release, their own website, and some very local websites? Since when are these sufficient to meet WP:ORG? Fram (talk) 20:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Here is an additional source from vilaweb.   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 19:15, 16 September 2010 (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.