Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Organisation of Communists of Italy (Marxist–Leninists)


 * 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 no consensus. Guerillero Parlez Moi 10:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Organisation of Communists of Italy (Marxist–Leninists)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Small and unknown local group without the slightest relevance. The page, devoid of sources, is written in two lines and merely states that this group existed. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 13:05, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics,  and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 13:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - article is being expanded, now referenced, notability clairified. Whilst the expansion isn't completed, italiens APO: ausser- und antiparlamentarische Gruppen der italienischen Linken und Ultralinken clearly has in-depth coverage, albeit Google Books snippet view makes it difficult to fully incorporate all relevant material. Judging from foot notes, there are numerous citations to mainstream press outlets (like Le Monde) indicating that the group was notable during its initial period of existence. --Soman (talk) 16:24, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - in Panorama, no. 567-575. Mondadori, 1977. p. 62 there is an article on the group (here called 'Oci'). The snippet view is terrible - but there are few factoids possible to deduce. It affirms that Oci was generally unknown to the general public, until issuing a manifesto in 1977 distributed in 50,000 copies, which made the group known. Moreover, it implies that Oci gained the trust of the CPC leadership, following the right-ward turn in the party leadership in China. Reading between lines, I'd presume that the new leadership in China enabled the mass distribution of OOCd'I(m-l)/Oci literature, but that's speculative on my behalf. --Soman (talk) 16:44, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - however, the alphabet soup of Italian ML movement has even me confounded...
 * http://www.misteriditalia.it/il68/fine-nascita/organizzazioni/imarxisti-leninisti.pdf, which I'm not sure qualifies as WP:RS mentions both a "Ed è proprio da questa che all’inizio del 1969 esce un gruppetto legato a Claudio Castellani che fonda una ennesima formazione m-l: l’Organizzazione dei Comunisti Italiani (m-l), con organo di stampa La Voce Rivoluzionaria." as well as further down "Dal PCd’I (m-l) (linea nera) viene espulso anche Pesce che fonda L’Organizzazione dei Comunisti (m-l) d’Italia con il giornale Linea proletaria." This in contrast to Berner (1973), essentially the ref currently used on the 1968 split in the article, which affirms that Pesce joined the Linea Rossa party. Berner (1973) states that Linea Rossa changes name to OCd'I(m-l) in 1971.
 * However, see also Bordone, S. (1983). LA NORMALIZZAZIONE DEI RAPPORTI TRA PCC E PCI. Il Politico, 48(1), 115–158. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43096971 ("Nel dicembre dello stesso anno la segreteria del PCd'I (m-l) fu acusata di essere la « linea nera » del partito - la stessa accusa era stata mossa in Cina a Liu Shaoqi - e venne espulsa in quanto « pugno di controrivoluzionari, cricca di rinnegati, infiltrati in posizione di potere ». La nuova segreteria, composta da Gracci, Dini e Sartori, rappresentava la « linea rossa », i veri rivoluzionari. La testata del giornale (dopo la scissione erano usciti una « Nuova Unità linea rossa » e una « Nuova Unità linea nera »), la cassa del partito ed il materiale propagandistico dei compagni cinesi rimase alla « linea nera », che venne riconosciuta da Pechino e da Tirana. Questa a sua volta subiva una scissione: Pesce, espulso dal partito con l'accusa di « separatismo ideologico e massimalismo », portava con sè una larga fetta di militanti e dava vita all'Organizzazione dei Comunisti (m-l) d'Italia col giornale « Linea proletaria ».")
 * the name given in Bordone (1983) somehwat matches the name used here: https://www.ebay.it/itm/202106175360 --Soman (talk) 17:48, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20200807154205/http://www.osvaldopesce.it/ pretty much settles that Pesce would not have been in Linea Rossa group, reverting my edits now --Soman (talk) 18:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Soman It does not seem to me that these sources demonstrate the encyclopedic relevance of this group, on the contrary... The page remains written in a single line.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:41, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Check the article history. I began an expansion, but effectively it was a dead end since one of the sources conflates the Pesce and Linea Rossa groups, so I reverted. I'm working on a draft. At this stage I think it's safe to say that 1) the names assigned to this faction varies a little bit, Peking Review used the English translation ' Organisation of Communists of Italy (Marxist–Leninists)', but in Italian the group itself used either 'Organizzazione dei comunisti marxisti-leninisti d’Italia' or 'Organizzazione dei comunisti (marxisti-leninisti) d’Italia'. See for example here: http://www.ifontanaritorremaggioresi.com/images/Linea-Proletaria_7.jpg, which both versions appearing on same page. I was a bit confused by the Organization of Italian Communists (ML), but that seems confirmed to have been a separate group. So the Organization of Communists of Italy (Marxist–Leninists) would be the Pesce group (i.e. the subject of this AfD) 2) Whilst PCUd'I was formed through a merger, I think it's safe to consider it a continuation of the Organization of Communists of Italy (Marxist–Leninists) (considering the 1977 congress as its '3rd congress', continuing to publish Linea proletaria) so I'd say we can Redirect this article to Unified Communist Party of Italy. 3) the factoid about the Bolongna Communist Committee (ML) in the earlier version seems to have been a misrepresentation of a source, rather the committee would have merged to the organization. Can't find a WP:RS, though. --Soman (talk) 20:06, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Soman I saw that you had expanded the page considerably. it is an underground political formation, so reconstructing its history is extremely complicated. However, if there have been proven international ties, the topic may have some meaning. My question is: Was the congress of the Unified Communist Party of Italy in 1978 numbered as third? In this circumstance, PCUdI would be the political continuation of OCd'I(m-l) de facto, right? If so, I think the most logical solution would be te merger of the pages. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 15:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @, exactly. PCUd'I considering its 1978 as its "3rd party congress", thus affirming that they saw themselves as the continuity of OC(m-l). Thus I think redirect is ok. --Soman (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, good. I see you have started a new article on the Communist Party of Italy (Marxist-Leninist) Red Line, I have some doubts about the necessity of stand-alone article even in that case, but let's talk on its talk page.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:49, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some political parties are extra-parliamentary by nature, but still they deserve an article on their own. Sources can be found and the article can be expanded. Thanks to User:Soman for what he is going to do to improve the article and let it survive. --Checco (talk) 06:20, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as it is now - single-sentence article, unsourced, no inherent notability. P1221 (talk) 10:13, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:33, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete or draftify Unsourced article. MrsSnoozyTurtle 01:49, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment It seemed to me that there was already consent to delete the page or transform it into a redirect: only one user has expressed himself for the maintenance (but the same user expresses himself for the maintenance of any page, regardless of the content), while also the author himself of the page admitted that another page already exists on the same party and that this one is not needed. --Scia Della Cometa (talk) 07:25, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, another admin will come by in a few days and close this AFD. Perhaps they will see the discussion as you do. Liz Read! Talk! 06:39, 9 August 2022 (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.