Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Working People's Vanguard Party

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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:35, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Working People's Vanguard Party

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A very minor political party, it never even contested an election. Because of this, I do not believe it is sufficiently notable for an article of its own, although it should be (and is) mentioned in the articles on the Liberator Party (with which it later merged) and the Working People's Alliance (which it was involved in establishing), both of which did contest elections. Number 5 7 21:09, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A minor party but one of historic significance in Guyana, as it influenced larger parties and movements. Its founder Brindley Benn served as deputy prime minister in the country's first elected government. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've expanded the article and added references, including the party's role in criticizing the People's Temple cult in Guyana. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South America-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:21, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – The article is notable, historically significant, and has reliable sources. Northamerica1000 (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Northamerica1000 and Cullen328. Notability is inherited by appearance in several reliable sources.Divide et Impera (talk) 16:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Historically significant minor party. Meets WP:N, particularly with references added by Cullen328.--JayJasper (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, having contested elections or not is not a good criteria for deletions. many notable parties decide not to contest elections on their own, rather supporting the candidatures of other parties for tactical reasons. --Soman (talk) 08:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I favor the lowest of all possible barriers to the inclusion of articles about political parties, their leaders, and their youth sections, regardless of ideology. This is the sort of material that SHOULD be in encyclopedias and deletions of this sort of material only weakens the encyclopedia. If an article needs more sourcing, tag it for more sourcing. Carrite (talk) 14:53, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.