Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pro-war 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 no consensus. W.marsh 21:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Pro-war Left

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No sign of any verifiable sources that a notable group actually exists. Yes, this term has been used by the media, but in a generalised sense rather than as referring to a specific grouping of people; Anti-war left has also been used by the media, but there's no actual group of those people either. Pak21 07:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The term is certainly notable and in use in political debates in Britain, a subject I can only presume the nominator is unfamiliar with. For instance there's this piece  by Johann Hari in the Independent discussing 'The pro-war left's disastrous misjudgment' in supporting the liberation of Iraq.  The piece is comprehensively demolished by Oliver Kamm here .  Here's an article on the widely read Guardian comment is free site  by John Lloyd, John Harris  and another by (the odious) Neil Clark .  The New Statesmen also discusses the term  here.  The fact that Nick Cohen and Chris Hitchens don't share a flat isn't exactly relevant.  One can define and discuss the 'pro war left' without it actually being a political party.  If Dissent magazine can do it  why can't Wikipedia? Nick mallory 11:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm more than familiar with political debate in the UK; such personal attacks won't help your case. I still hold that while this term is used by various bits of the media, there isn't actually a grouping of people here. How exactly would I know if someone is a member of this group? To go from the article, "the Euston Manifesto is the closest the PWL has come to a statement of its principles." but also that "[the manifesto] is ambivalent about supporting the invasion of Iraq", which seems to be rather contradictory. As to why a random magazine can define the term but Wikipedia can't, that's the difference between a comment magazine and an encyclopedia. --Pak21 11:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
 * There doesn't have to be a march under the banner of 'the pro war left' for it to be a notable term. It doesn't have to be an actual organised group.  It's not a personal attack to point out that you're wrong on this one.Nick mallory 23:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Adequate notability and citations. If membership is disputed for particular individuals then edit or cite accordingly.  This is not a reason to delete the whole article. Colonel Warden 12:27, 18 October 2007 (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.