Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Voice for Children and Families


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  18:33, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Voice for Children and Families

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:ORG and WP:GNG. A tiny Slovenian political party that received 0.23% in a national vote and then folded or merged. No verifiable sources. May even be WP:PROPAGANDA. Grung0r (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Grung0r (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Grung0r (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Slovenia-related deletion discussions. Grung0r (talk) 05:30, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Comment: I originally created the article. Most sources are reputable national media organisations. The party received significant independent media coverage (as per notability guidelines). The page was created during a time when it was being speculated whether the party may be decisive in the formation of a potential future right-wing coalition government and creating an arch-conservative political current in the country (which - in retrospect - obviously did not happen, but the page might have been of much more general interest if that had been the case). It was also one of the parties often polled in opinion polling for the 2018 Slovenian parliamentary election.

Kind regards, -J Jay Hodec (talk) 07:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jay, the party received quite some media coverage back then. Among the sources are major Slovenian news outlets, which are reputable sources. --Tone 17:50, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There isn't a country in the world that I would broadly claim that their major news outlets are "reputable", and WP:PUS and WP:DEPRECATED will back me up. This is a still a non-story even if it was reported in the New York Times, but the fact is, it wasn't. It was published by state owned media companies using reporters who are anonymous and unattributed.  Grung0r (talk) 02:46, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * "It was published by state owned media companies using reporters who are anonymous and unattributed." Even if that would make sources unreliable (are BBC/DW/NPR unreliable sources?) there are plenty of news sources published by privately-owned media in the article, and more could be added if this is actually of concern. In fact, you may find that Slovenian public media organisations often take a more neutral approach in their reporting than private ones. Furthermore, authors are attributed, however, sometimes only initials are given. This is a common practice in multiple Slovenian public and private media organisation and is not unheard of in other countries. -J Jay Hodec (talk) 03:29, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * At least Delo (newspaper), Dnevnik (Slovenia), Mladina, and RTVSLO are reputable sources. Some other sources are less-reliable, but the first four are enough for GNG. --Tone 12:37, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * In some instances, I used right-wing/party-friendly publications, however, I think I always treated them as basically primary sources (i.e. for citing statements/press releases by proxy). -J Jay Hodec (talk) 14:11, 16 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Mladina was a former employer of Janez Janša, and seemingly where he made his name. They can hardly be considered reliable  source for these purposes. It would be like if Boris Johnson had written for the..oh, wait...Grung0r (talk) 07:55, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * To the contrary, Mladina has been very critical of Janša/SDS for a long time now. In any case, it's coverage is generally held to be reliable. -J Jay Hodec (talk) 13:08, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I'd close myself but I participated in the discussion.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tone 09:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 15:40, 31 August 2020 (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.