Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guard of New Prussia
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. Mr.Z-man 04:16, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Guard of New Prussia
"Guard of New Prussia" gets only a couple of hundred google hits; none of them are reputable news sources and most are just usegroup postings asking for new members. There are no references to back up this organization's notability. The 'official web site' has just an image and a phone number (though there are a few hidden pages if you search on Google). This is a non-notable organization.
The page about it's leader Joe Foss (GNP) should also be deleted if this one is. user talk:199.71.183.2 18:07, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Non notable organisation - no sources except its own website and a You tube page. Obina (talk) 22:05, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Caknuck (talk) 21:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 13:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- Process "vote" to keep -- insufficient to substantiate deletionist agenda. Article undoubtledly requires clean-up & sourcing, but it asserts notability as a political movement. -- Simon Cursitor (talk) 14:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
- Excuse me, but what is a "procedural vote"? Are you the closing admin? (That's who should take care of procedural questions, not the "voters".) --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - without substantial independent sources (and no one has presented any), there's no base for an encyclopedia article. An article sourced to the organization's website only can hardly ever meet the standards of WP:NPOV, which is particularly important for political topics. It also fails WP:ORG for the same reason. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:04, 13 December 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.
