Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/American Moderation Party
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 talk July 7, 2005 13:30 (UTC)
[edit] American Moderation Party
Wikipedia is not a place for promotion of political parties. Spam - delete unless rewritten. - Mike Rosoft 29 June 2005 23:17 (UTC)
- Delete. Political party with no known candidates. David | Talk 29 June 2005 23:21 (UTC)
- Delete--"Results 1 - 1 of 1 for "American Moderation Party". Remove unless notability is proven. Meelar (talk) June 30, 2005 00:05 (UTC)
- Delete, although their platform makes me hope they are successful enough to actually merit an article in the future. -- BD2412 talk June 30, 2005 00:06 (UTC)
- Delete nn, promotion, come back if they make something of themselves. --Etacar11 30 June 2005 00:44 (UTC)
- Delete political promo. JamesBurns 30 June 2005 03:54 (UTC)
- Keep seems objective to me. User:Twistedflatcat 30 June 2005 01:15
- From the Author:
- 6/29/05 - As the writer of this article, I am also the founder. I intend to full run based on the principles I have outlined. Unfortunately, I live in Texas, which does not favor minor candidates (nor does any state in this Union). So it is my hope that these principles are adopted nationwide beginning at the local level (which are largely non-partisan) and eventually the national level. Yes, I am only one man, and yes, the system is stacked against me, but there is an article on George Galloway, the MP from the UK, who is also the only office holder of his party. Is there any objective reason why my article cannot remain if I am not overtly promoting my party? I am merely presenting the positions and hoping it sparks some interest. I am not directing them to my website, nor asking for money. I am more than willing to re-write this article if it means it can remain. This is my first submission, and as such, I am not familiar with all the technicalities (although I attempted to read them, which is why I left the webpage off of the original article). Contact me at jj4sad6@yahoo.com if responding.
- Yes. There are political parties with 1 candidate in Wikipedia. I even saved one from deletion a while back (Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Pakistan Social Democratic Party). The difference between them and you is the important thing about an encyclopaedia: We are not a primary source. If no-one else has ever written about your political party, then the only source of information is you, and anything about the party is primary source material directly from you. Everything in Wikipedia must be verifiable. Party aims, membership, and policies which we only have your word for are not verifiable. We only have your word that your party even exists. Be written about by newspapers. Field candidates at elections. Get officially registered as a political party. Then come back for an encyclopaedia article. Delete. Uncle G June 30, 2005 13:16 (UTC)
- 6/30/05 - Added an infobox, added more background information, linked page to other articles. I'm not sure how famous I can make AMP in 4 more days, but if that's what it takes to save this article, then I'll try it. I'm trying to make it as objective and informational as possible. I am not saying "Vote for me!" or "Send me money!" I have asked my supporters to post here in favor of the party just so you know it's not just me. So far, my other good friend from San Antonio has left a comment. If I am required to collect 500 votes in favor of my party to keep this informational article alive, then again, I'll do it. Once again, this comes down to the fact that I see no difference between my article and one for say the American Nazi Party, who also do not have any candidates in office to my knowledge. The only difference I see is that my party does not have the history backing it up, but it wouldn't being only 2 months old. So again, I ask that if this can be edited, you tell me what you would suggest, and I am happy to do so.
- As one who has edited George Galloway on occasion I can say that he is an entirely different prospect. He was notable when elected to Parliament in 1987 for the Labour Party, and probably before that as a charity organiser. His party, RESPECT, has a national organisation and obtained significant votes in the June 2004 elections in the UK. He is the only RESPECT MP but they have elected members of local authorities as well. It is therefore fundamentally different to this article which is about a party which has yet to establish notability. David | Talk 30 June 2005 08:14 (UTC)
- 6/30/05 - I understand the concerns of notability, but I have read the pages concerning the deletion policy and it is a little gray on that matter. My goal is to make this an encyclopedic entry. Several of you have stated it is not and needs to be re-written. Again, I am asking for HOW you would like it to be written so as to prevent the deletion. I have read the pages for the Reform Party, the Green Party, the American Nazi Party, and a few other parties with no candidates in office and I have attempted to base my article on their example. Again, I am not trying to promote myself, just merely attempting to present the information. If re-writting the article is required, I am again asking for how you would like it rewritten. I am new here, and I have attempted to make it as objective as possible. Please help me to make it an acceptable article.
- Rendering the NPOV is a cleanup/rewrite task. If you can cite sources for information about your party other than your own web site(s), please do, and we can work on an article that convinces editors, with citations of independent sources, that your political party actually exists on the political radar. If you cannot cite sources, then it is not lack of objectivity that you fail on. You've made commendable efforts to be objective. But one important facet of "promotion" is that people come here to write articles about things that no-one else knows about, in an effort to introduce new things into human knowledge by having them in Wikipedia. That's not what Wikipedia is for, no matter how objectively it is done. Uncle G June 30, 2005 13:32 (UTC)
- Well, I am working on getting some national blogs and websites to write about my party. Would that be sufficient? It is pretty much an impossibility that I can get attention from USA Today or the Washington Post (besides, an anti-Corporation party would be counter productive to their interests).
- If you get officially registered as a political party, and actually field candidates listed on ballots at elections, then that would be enough for most editors for an article on a political party. (The bar for biographical articles on individual candidates is higher, though, and generally only includes the candidates that win elections.) But that's in the future as yet. This discussion is about now, and as of now that hasn't happened. When and if your party does gain traction, come back with cited sources. Cite independent coverage of your party, and its election fortunes, in newspapers. Cite government web sites listing registered political parties. Cite your election results. And so forth. You should have little to no problem then. The current text will have been deleted. However, it will not be lost. To re-gain access to it, once your party has gained traction, go to Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion and present the cited sources as evidence that your party has become encyclopaedia-worthy in the interim and that its article should be undeleted on "new information" grounds. If the article is undeleted, it will save you writing this text over again. Uncle G July 1, 2005 11:28 (UTC)
- Well, I am working on getting some national blogs and websites to write about my party. Would that be sufficient? It is pretty much an impossibility that I can get attention from USA Today or the Washington Post (besides, an anti-Corporation party would be counter productive to their interests).
- Rendering the NPOV is a cleanup/rewrite task. If you can cite sources for information about your party other than your own web site(s), please do, and we can work on an article that convinces editors, with citations of independent sources, that your political party actually exists on the political radar. If you cannot cite sources, then it is not lack of objectivity that you fail on. You've made commendable efforts to be objective. But one important facet of "promotion" is that people come here to write articles about things that no-one else knows about, in an effort to introduce new things into human knowledge by having them in Wikipedia. That's not what Wikipedia is for, no matter how objectively it is done. Uncle G June 30, 2005 13:32 (UTC)
- 6/29/05 - As the writer of this article, I am also the founder. I intend to full run based on the principles I have outlined. Unfortunately, I live in Texas, which does not favor minor candidates (nor does any state in this Union). So it is my hope that these principles are adopted nationwide beginning at the local level (which are largely non-partisan) and eventually the national level. Yes, I am only one man, and yes, the system is stacked against me, but there is an article on George Galloway, the MP from the UK, who is also the only office holder of his party. Is there any objective reason why my article cannot remain if I am not overtly promoting my party? I am merely presenting the positions and hoping it sparks some interest. I am not directing them to my website, nor asking for money. I am more than willing to re-write this article if it means it can remain. This is my first submission, and as such, I am not familiar with all the technicalities (although I attempted to read them, which is why I left the webpage off of the original article). Contact me at jj4sad6@yahoo.com if responding.
- I wish you luck (I grew up in Texas and know how difficult it is for Democrats to get elected there, let alone third-party candidates), but what you've written is not an encyclopedia article. Delete. --Angr/tɔk tə mi 30 June 2005 06:37 (UTC)
- Delete. Well written and styled but unfortunately nn. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish June 30, 2005 17:36 (UTC)
- Delete. I echo what the lister said, but would like to add: "Wikipedia is not a place for promotion of new/unknown political parties." (If you've got ballot access, that's fine by me and you can stay here. Otherwise, good luck getting your party off the ground anyway, but wait on having an article here until the rest of the internet knows who you are. I'm a Libertarian, so I know what it's like to be in a party with little to no publicity from the news media... but then again Wikipedia is not a place for self-promotion. --Idont Havaname 1 July 2005 05:19 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.
