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 Draftify.. Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Keystone Party of Manitoba

Keystone Party of Manitoba (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Non-notable political party, fails WP:NORG and WP:GNG. Curbon7 ( talk) 13:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC) reply

*Weak keep: The citations I found ( [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]) provide a fair amount of significant coverage, particularly for a newly formed (and verifiably registered) party. Sal2100 ( talk) 17:32, 1 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 13:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:58, 14 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 18:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC) reply

I tried to add as much as i could using the parties website, social media, CBC reports, and stories from Manitobans Newspapers. I listed 9 new sources of information, but it would appear someone took it all down. There is a lot of information about this party, its odd that people are unwilling to add more to this article. there are defunct parties in Manitoba with less information available, yet have better articles than Keystone. very strange MBpoliticsGUY ( talk) 19:23, 22 July 2022 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure it was necessary to remove all of this information, but most of it was not appropriate. The WP:ABOUTSELF policy specifies that articles should not be based primarily on sources like own websites and social media. Femke ( talk) 19:28, 22 July 2022 (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.
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 Draftify.. Liz Read! Talk! 01:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Keystone Party of Manitoba

Keystone Party of Manitoba (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested PROD. Non-notable political party, fails WP:NORG and WP:GNG. Curbon7 ( talk) 13:02, 30 June 2022 (UTC) reply

*Weak keep: The citations I found ( [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]) provide a fair amount of significant coverage, particularly for a newly formed (and verifiably registered) party. Sal2100 ( talk) 17:32, 1 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 13:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 18:58, 14 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless ( talk) 18:27, 22 July 2022 (UTC) reply

I tried to add as much as i could using the parties website, social media, CBC reports, and stories from Manitobans Newspapers. I listed 9 new sources of information, but it would appear someone took it all down. There is a lot of information about this party, its odd that people are unwilling to add more to this article. there are defunct parties in Manitoba with less information available, yet have better articles than Keystone. very strange MBpoliticsGUY ( talk) 19:23, 22 July 2022 (UTC) reply
I'm not sure it was necessary to remove all of this information, but most of it was not appropriate. The WP:ABOUTSELF policy specifies that articles should not be based primarily on sources like own websites and social media. Femke ( talk) 19:28, 22 July 2022 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook