Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United Patriots Front


 * 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.  Sandstein  20:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

United Patriots Front

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Twenty dudes who hold a couple rallies doth not notability make. They're a tiny far-right splinter group of a larger far-right movement that no one's bothered to write an article about, and their coverage in reliable sources is completely minimal. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 04:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and WP:USERFYIT, perhas reincarnate it as "Reclaim Australia". this and this source seem to claim they are a splinter group of Reclaim Australia. The RA article is poorly sourced but a lot of hits turn up in Google News for it so RA probably has notability. AadaamS (talk) 08:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * - Reclaim Australia: Reduce Immigration is a totally different group. They were a defunct political party in the 1990s. The Reclaim Australia being referred to here is a far-right protest coalition that currently does not have an article. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 13:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi The Drover&#39;s Wife, ok I had this suspicion from the content of the info on the RARI page. So I would then suggest that this page be reworded & renamed to "Reclaim Australia" as a stub. AadaamS (talk) 16:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Which article? I don't think this provides any useful information about Reclaim Australia (which is not a clear-cut case for notability either) and this does not remotely pass WP:GNG in its own right. It needs to be deleted and then if someone wants to write one on Reclaim Australia we can have that discussion separately. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 22:57, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi The Drover&#39;s Wife, now that the creator of the article has shown up I think it's best to WP:USERFYIT until its notability is more clear-cut. My suggestion was to rename this UPF article to "Reclaim Australia" but I agree it's better to delete this article. So I change my vote again. AadaamS (talk) 07:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 12:04, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete – totally, it's not notable and I would have doubts about Reclaim Australia also – Hshook (talk) 03:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Delete or possibly userfy. Besides one recent event, there's not a lot of decent coverage. That could well change in the future, though. Doctorhawkes (talk) 04:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Although I am the article's creator, this group has since held another public event as seen here which again got media attention and is the main force pushing for their upcoming nationwide rallies on July 18. They aren't the same as Reclaim Australia, there was a public sit between them two, which is how this far right faction formed, and RARI is a separate group altogether. This group is quickly becoming Australia's version of EDL. As stated, it could well change in the future and I believe we're about to see this. There is a lot more I would like to put in, but most of the more controversial things they have said/done are written in blogs, hardly credible for Wikipedia. I believe the media will shine light on that soon. Erico993 (talk) 13:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi Erico993, the notability of this subject is borderline I think you are better off userfying it (see WP:USERFYIT) and perhaps reincarnate it as "Reclaim Australia once the notability of either "Reclaim Australia" or UPF is beyond doubt. AadaamS (talk) 07:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 00:13, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Coverage of an event is not coverage of the actual organization itself. The organization itself does not need to be known in context to understand the event. Furthermore, the event is not notable. Esquivalience t 04:49, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I think we should wait before deleting this page until after the July 18 rally, projected numbers marked as 'attending' on the facebook event pages are around 4,000. There has now been media interest as apparently, one of the members of the United Patriots Front are planning on bringing firearms. Erico993 (talk) 08:21, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Facebook isn't a WP:RS and so cannot be used as evidence for notability. We also cannot rely on future events WP:CRYSTALBALL. If you wish to write about UPF I think it's better that you perhaps create a page named "Reclaim Australia" because that turns up many more hits in Google Search for sourcing to verify notability. UPF could then be a subsection of that new article and redirect there. AadaamS (talk) 07:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Userfy for now per WP:NOTNEWS, until (and if) the subject meets the GNG.  Mini  apolis  17:44, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Wait 24+ hours - George Christensen (politician) will address a rally tomorrow and on the front page of ABC news online is this. There's a federal "Halal food" investigation - this is notable. See also The Daily Stormer and Halal certification in Australia -- Callinus (talk) 09:06, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Also SBS news.com.au theaustralian 3aw.
 * That's about the group this splintered from, and has no bearing on this article. George Christensen has nothing to do with these people. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 21:43, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kraxler (talk) 14:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have started the Reclaim Australia article. StAnselm (talk) 07:58, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per Erico993. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 03:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am in favor of the lowest possible barriers to articles about political parties, their youth sections, or their leaders, without regard to size or ideology. This is the sort of material that readers have every right to expect a comprehensive encyclopedia to include. So my primary argument is in accord with the Policy of IAR (Use Common Sense to Improve the Encyclopedia). Moreover, there clearly exists sufficient independently published coverage of presumed reliability to merit a GNG pass, in my opinion. Carrite (talk) 18:27, 24 July 2015 (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.