Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pirate Party of India


 * 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. Mackensen (talk) 01:44, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Pirate Party of India

 * – ( View AfD View log  Party of India Stats )

I believe that this article is about a bogus "organisation" (so-called Pirate Party of India).


 * 1) The organisation is NOT NOTABLE, fails WP:GNG and has no sources beyond its website.
 * 2) The organisation exists only in cyberspace.
 * 3) The article as it exists is a HOAX or makes exaggerated claims.
 * 4) The organisation is not constituted/formed and is certainly not a minor political party as claimed in the article.
 * 5) The organisation does not have the bare number of 100 members to constitute themselves in law.
 * 6) The organisation is not registered with the Election Commission of India
 * 7) The organisation is not recognised with the Election Commission of India
 * 8) The organisation has not contested even a single election
 * 9) The organisation has not won even a single election
 * 10) The organisation has not received even a single vote.
 * 11) There is off-wiki sock-puppeting going on with WP:COI editors.
 * 12) The organisation's graphics are copyvios of the Pirate Party and the Pirate Bay.TheSmuttyProfessor (talk) 09:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Note Considering that the Pirate Party OPPOSES copyright, I don't really think they will care about someone using their graphics. Sfgiants1995 (talk) 10:05, 30 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment the Swedish version in Commons states they expect acknowledgement of the source, and the Trademark rights are retained. Pirate Party stands for reform of copyright not its "abolition". TheSmuttyProfessor (talk) 10:19, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

- Blaisemcrowly (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment The logo was derived from work of PP-Belgium which is under public domain.


 * Comment Blaisemcrowly had also created another page on Us (music band) which was speedied. Indiankela1953 (talk) 05:34, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


 * DELETE. fails GNG. No independent RS coverage. Maybe in 6 months time. Protozoan (talk) 06:29, 1 December 2012 (UTC)


 * REMOVE The only coverage is in blogs. Entry makes the exceptional claim it is a political party in India. Such exceptional claims require exceptional sources. Even minor parties like Professionals Party of India are registered with Election Commission of India. Until party is registered with Election Commission it cannot claim to be a political party. After registration the next step is recognition by the Election Commission which can be refused. Pirate Party of India is not registered, so it has no legal existence. The entry is evasive on where or when it was founded. The entries on other Pirate Party websites is by courtesy. Indiankela1953 (talk) 05:34, 2 December 2012 (UTC)


 * SPEEDY DELETE Section 2(f) of the Representation of the People Act 1951, available online here defines a political party in India to mean "an association or body of individual citizens registered with the Election Commission as a political party under section 29A." AlphaTomato (talk) 11:27, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Clarifications serbian pirate party founder aleksander have blogged about them, the political atmosphere in India is an adverse one for pirate party and can hence fail much coverage by mainstream media. |  >The organisation exists only in cyberspace. ::: Is an unregistered organisation offline.
 * aleksander have blogged about them : https://blaeks.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/incredible-pirates-of-india/
 * Pirate party Uk (irc) have listed them as unregistered party : http://pirateirc.net/parties
 * Listed in Pirate Party International's website : http://www.pp-international.net/

>The organisation is not constituted/formed and is certainly not a minor political party as claimed in the article. ::: '''Organisation can exist before being officially registered with the Election Commision as per indian law. And formation process does not mean they don't exist. '''

>The organisation does not have the bare number of 100 members to constitute themselves in law  ::: This is only required at the time of registration, during formation state it is not necessary.

>The organisation is not registered with the Election Commission of India ::: Organisation is allowed to exist during formation state and 30 days after full formation by EC.

The following points are irrelavent to the validity of the article as these are not factors that define a political party even under law in India Blaisemcrowly (talk) 20:06, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) The organisation has not contested even a single election
 * 2) The organisation has not won even a single election
 * 3) The organisation has not received even a single vote.
 * Comment: I'd be interested to know if the party is registered in any sense in India at the national or state level. As a corporation, something. Otherwise, I view this as a WP:TOOSOON at best.
 * Comment It is not a party. It is not constituted. It is not registered in any sense in India either at the state or national level. In fact they could not even apply for registration because they don't have even 20 people to form the "party". All it is a tiny handful of people running a ragtag website and squabbling among themselves. TheSmuttyProfessor (talk) 17:37, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops, I forgot to sign my previous comment. Anyway given that my vote is Delete with an encouragement to the article's editor to come on back once the party is duly registered. Faustus37 (talk) 23:21, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. A bogus party which exists only in its website. Salih  ( talk ) 04:59, 5 December 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.