Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UKIP Eastleigh

UKIP Eastleigh

 * 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 Speedy deleted. Szzuk (talk) 08:51, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BRANCH - non-notable local chapter of UKIP. Recommend delete. Pedro : Chat  12:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ORG. We quite rightly don't have articles on every branch of the Conservative Party, and we shouldn't have one on this UKIP branch either. Quite simply, the UKIP is notable, and this branch is not notable in the grand scheme of things. --  Ohc  ¡digame! 13:05, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

I Disagree. The Eastleigh Branch has been instrumental in the change in public opinion. The Eastleigh By-Election saw a massive increase in UKIP Public opinion. Eastleigh has been the cause of the wave of public support for the party. After the By-Election, Ukip, a party that was considered a fringe party, has seem massive gains across the country. This is due to UKIP Eastleigh. This should not be lost to history. It should be documented and recorded. Hdiuk (talk) 13:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

General Election 2010: Eastleigh 1,933 votes 3.6%

Eastleigh by-election, 2013 11,571 Votes 27.8% +24% (A Huge Increase in public Support)

This was then followed by the Hampshire county elections where UKIP took 3 Seats in Eastleigh. this is shown on the page and clearly shows the huge increase in public opinion. All eyes have been on Eastleigh and this as I said above, has started the change on a national scale. UKIP Eastleigh is nationally recognized by the media and the party supporters as the most important Branch Hdiuk (talk) 13:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * At best, some of the above should be in the UKIP or Eastleigh by-election, 2013 articles - if you can find reliable sources. None of what you have stated justifies a stand alone article as it doesn't establish the notability of the Eastleigh branch of UKIP. Pedro : Chat  13:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

The Change in public opinion towards the UK Independence party is possibly one of the most important and historic events that has happened for hundreds of years. Certainly of modern times. The fact is, this change could start the collapse of the European Union. The collapse of the EU would be an event that possibly rivals that of the collapse of the Roman Empire or the Soviet Union. Surely the UKIP Branch that started all this is worth recognition in an archive as important as Wikipedia? Hdiuk (talk) 13:52, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you have a reliable source for the above Hdiuk or is it just your personal opinion? Either way, please also see WP:CRYSTAL. Pedro : Chat  13:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I do understand that, any reference to predictions I make on this talk page does not appear in the Article. I am simply pointing out the possibilities and that it would be appropriate for it to be documented for historical value. Will History books not detail how the Rise of UKIP occurred? Hdiuk (talk) 14:08, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - a tertiary source. If/when books are written about how the Eastleigh branch of UKIP was pivotal in the UK exit of the EU then we can use them as a reliable source in some article or the other. Wikipedia is NOT however about "documenting history". I appreciate your good faith efforts, but you're misunderstanding the purpose of an encyclopedia. Pedro : Chat  14:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to UK Independence Party. The branch itself is not notable: events there are notable in the context of UKIP attempts to become a significant political force.TheLongTone (talk) 14:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete We do not have articles on other local branches of political parties. Material here is covered already elsewhere under the by-election article and relevant local election articles. Bondegezou (talk) 16:33, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Single branches are very rarely notable. This one isn't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:28, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete as we don't need an article on every single branch. →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  19:58, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Added Reference from WikiNews clearly reports UKIP vote was the highest the party ever had in Eastleigh Meaning branch is notable 86.144.171.129 (talk) 22:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No - you're taking a fact that the vote for UKIP was high (which we can source) and using that to claim that this makes the Eastleigh branch of UKIP notable - when the fact actually just makes Eastleigh by-election, 2013 more notable. Pedro : Chat  08:29, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Sorry but how is this relevant enough for a Wikipedia article? Do you see any other local branches of any other national parties having their own page on Wikipedia? If we did there would be 1000s. If a Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland page was made, there might be a case for adding them as Labour, Lib Dems and Tories have separate pages but that is on the basis of them having seats in the devolved chambers. The other case for adding local branches is for local parties/groups of independents e.g. Barnsley Independent Group or Boston District Independents. UKIP Eastleigh is not an independent local party, it is part of a large national party.
 * The content of this article could be included in the various articles that exist where relevant eg Eastleigh by-election, 2013, Eastleigh, Borough of Eastleigh or even in the UKIP article where relevant. I'd urge caution with adding info to the UKIP page as people seem to treat it as a news feed by adding things of non encyclopaedic or indeed historical relevance. Owl In The House (talk) 13:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it is important to distinguish between events that happen in a by-election such as Eastleigh, from the particular local branch of a given party such as UKIP. Other more notable by-elections such as Bermondsey 1983 or Newport 1922 would not merit individual pages for Bermondsey Liberals or Newport Unionists. I am struggling to think of any branch of a UK political party at any stage in history that might merit an individual page. Suffice to say, I doubt if Eastleigh UKIP would be in my top 1,000. Graemp (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Of no importance, it is just a local branch. Szzuk (talk) 16:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete The party itself is notable, but local branches aren't. If this one has contributed to the party's success, that should be noted briefly in the appropriate place - the party's article. Peridon (talk) 22:16, 14 March 2014 (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.