Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Patriot
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 redirect to David Steinman. WjBscribe 00:57, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Green Patriot
Appears to be a one-man "party" or close to that. No references or reliable sources are cited. A Google search on "Green Patriot" + "David Steinman" found no non-trivial mentions except self-published ones. Specifically it found the organizations web site, the founder's various sites, many sites selling or listing one of Steinman's books, and a couple of blog posts. That's it. A search on "Green Patriot" alone found various uses unconnected with this organization in addition to the above. Nothing that could serve as a reliable source was found. Now there might well be offline sources, but none are cited. Seems non-notable. DES (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as per my nom. A brief mention as part of David Steinman should be sufficient. DES (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, I added some sources to the article. There are also print articles coming out about this movement in Awareness magazine, Energy Times and Southern Sierran magazine. Will this be helpful? Thank you. Freedompress 21:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- response So far as i can see, all of the links you added are interviews with David Steinman, or articles written by him. Is there any citeable reliable source, independant of Steinman, that would establish that this is more than a one-man-band, or Steinman plus a few associates? Has any news source actually covered this party? As for "articles coming out", Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, they can be used when they have actually been published, provided thay are not written by Steinman or soemone else closely associated with him. That is my view. DES (talk) 22:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, DES. We added a few addtional resources showing people mention the idea of "Green Patriotism". We aren't claiming that it is a party, but an idea and a new movement. Sure we can try again with the new articles if this article is deleted. Does someone need to second your vote of deletion? Thanks again.Freedompress 01:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- There needs to be consensus. Fishal 16:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
- Weak delete I hope they will become notable. enough said.DGG 05:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect to David Steinman. Since by all appeareances he is the only member of this "party", at the moment this is just a content fork. - iridescenti (talk to me!) 11:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect per Iridescenti. The man is notable, but the concept is not. Fishal 16:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
- I just added paragraph that Thomas L. Friedman, a Pulitzer Prize winner, used the term "Green Patriotism" in the cited NY Times article, as has Tom Daschle, independent of any association with Steinman. Freedompress 19:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
- comment OK we now have a "concept" (not a party) that is largely promoted by one notable but not famous individual, and has had brief single mentions by two quite well-known individuals. Indeed it is is not fully clear that the concept that Friedman and Daschle had in mind is the same or nearly the same as the one that Steinman espouses and promotes, because their mentions are too brief to know at all celarly what they mean by the words. I find no evidence of widespread use of thsi term is a concept or meme -- one person as a promotor, plus two brief if not trivial mentiosn by well-known (even famous) figures is not enough to mak a "concept" notable, IMO. DES (talk) 21:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
- Question I would like to move this page to say "Green Patriotism". Is this allowed at this time or should I wait until the article status is resolved? Freedompress 17:31, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment I'd say don't do it - especially since it looks likely that the result of this AfD will be delete or redirect, there probably won't be anything left to move anyway, and recreating the text under a new title will be speedy-deleted under CSD:G4. If the AfD results in keep, just go ahead and move it - iridescenti (talk to me!) 18:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Moves durnign an AFD tend to screw up the link between the page and the AfD discussion. Even if you fix all those, they may screw up people who have one or the other watchlisted or bookmarked. Such moves are generally frowned on. If the article is not deleted, move it then, and please fix up links to it as much as possible. 18:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I'd say don't do it - especially since it looks likely that the result of this AfD will be delete or redirect, there probably won't be anything left to move anyway, and recreating the text under a new title will be speedy-deleted under CSD:G4. If the AfD results in keep, just go ahead and move it - iridescenti (talk to me!) 18:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect to David Steinman. Not enough verified, third-party notability for the article. - BierHerr 19:10, 23 April 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.
