Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SNP Trade Union Group (2nd nomination)


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Enos733 (talk) 16:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

SNP Trade Union Group
AfDs for this article:


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

I have been trying to improve the quality of the page for a while but there is simply not enough sourcing to create a more complete article the only independent sources I can find that mention the topic in more than passing are a article in the daily star about an opinion piece by one of the groups opponents and a letter in the Scotsman from someone involved in it.

It should be redirected to the Scottish National Party, I generally lean towards maintaining articles on niche topics but there's no point maintaining a source-less stud if it can not be improved.--Llewee (talk) 23:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2022 January 10.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 00:11, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Present content has no bearing on notability, AfD is not clean up. There have been no actual content-related edits to the article since the first AfD closed 8 months ago with no consensus; it's unclear what attempts to improve the article have been made since then.  During the first AfD, I found nine sources to demonstrate notability - how is the existence of those nine sources no longer relevant?  Given the last AfD was a relatively short time ago, at the very least an analysis disputing the sources presented would be in order. It bears repeating, with 14,000 members, this is the largest affiliated organisation of the SNP.  FWIW, further sources not included in the last AfD.


 * Passes WP:NONPROFIT. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 09:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I was looking for sources but couldn't find anything adequate, to say, cover the subject's history. Most of those sources you listed mention the subject in passing. The fact that this article has existed as a stub without sources throughout most of Wikipedia's history and has been one of a small handful of articles listed as requiring urgent attention on the UK politics project since the last AFD does kind of lend itself to my point. If their were fast amounts of high quality sources available to turn the article into some kind of detailed well sourced page then presumable someone would have done it by now.--Llewee (talk) 11:03, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:NEGLECT and WP:NOIMPROVEMENT. We're building an encyclopedia not a bridge, where's the urgent attention needed? There's 15 sources now available, more than enough to sustain an article.  Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment I've made an attempt at clean up of the article, adding seven sources and more details and removing unnecessary parts. Editors may wish to consider WP:HEY (or not). Am pinging  who indicated an intention to incorporate the identified sources at the last nomination of this article.  So as to be completely transparent, also pinging all other previous participants:, , , . Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a page long (two half pages) discussion of the SNP TUG forerunner, the Association of Scottish Nationalist Trade Unionists (ASNTU), in Jack Brand's The National Movement in Scotland (1978) (page numbers not available, but visible on Google Books in the section titled "Industrial structure of the party"). Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 02:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep per Goldsztajn. Sourcing is sufficient for GNG. Organisation is clearly notable enough for an article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:32, 11 January 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.