Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Lyal's Witchery Tour Party

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 delete. Sr13 04:37, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adam Lyal's Witchery Tour Party

Adam Lyal's Witchery Tour Party (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A joke political party which was presumably founded as a promotional stunt for an Edinburgh "ghost tour" company. Now prank parties can be notable sometimes, but this article doesn't establish notability (the vote numbers are not really impressive) and doesn't quote any sources at all. High on a tree 00:15, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Subject appears to be WP:NN, and the article does not provide any WP:RS. --Evb-wiki 00:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete subject is a hoax, no references. Tiptoety 00:21, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom Harlowraman 00:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Very dubious, no references. If I removed everything that was unreferenced and highly dubious I would be left with a blank article. Gee, sure wish we could speedy this. Until(1 == 2) 00:29, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per all deletes. NHRHS2010 Talk 01:12, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Very likely to be a nonsense article. No references. Slartibartfast1992 01:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Doesn't assert notability, no sources, seems non-notable. Bart133 (t) (c) 04:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, it seems non-notable. Also unattributed. Carlosguitar 08:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete, I know from personal experience that this is a 'genuine' party. They did get more votes than UKIP or the Christian People's Alliance in the last election, and three times as many as Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers. Minor mentions in the news; for example [1].--Nydas(Talk) 12:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
It's mentioned lower down in the article.--Nydas(Talk) 15:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete There is no references which is the main reason of the weak delete option, although this is not a hoax or nonsense article based on the Google hitsJForget 16:11, 22 July 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.