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. Stifle (talk) 12:27, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Garibaldian Antifascist Partisan Movement of Italy[edit]

Garibaldian Antifascist Partisan Movement of Italy (edit | 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)

Virtually unknown regional party and barely mentioned in a few sources, which scored in 1946 an ephemeral result (0.19%) in the only Naples constituency. It was just one of the many lists that participated in the Italian elections of 1946, but definitely does not meet WP:GNG. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 21:19, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Italy. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable subject, quite valuable information that would be lost. --Checco (talk) 07:30, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Checco: Even in this case: why notable? Not for its electoral result: it scored just 0.0% of the vote in 1946. The article must be evaluated for the available sources (and I see only a few mentions about it), while I don't honestly see any "valuable information that would be lost" on this article.--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 12:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:43, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There is not enough supporting material out there for an independent article on the Garibaldian Antifascist Partisan Movement. On the contrary, there is quite enough material for the creator and leader of the party, Sante Garibaldi. An article in the English-language Wikipedia about him is overdue, as one can see perusing the lemma in the French and Italian Wikipedias. The information about the party belongs in a section there. -The Gnome (talk) 12:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Whilst the party was electorally marginal, . The party folded well before internet and google, but would have had a certain degree of notability in contemporary press records. And as shown by Voci e volti della democrazia: cultura e impegno civile da Gobetti a Bauer there is also in-depth coverage of the party, spanning several pages. In the absence of an article on Sante Garibaldi, a deletion of this article would eliminate the key factoid presented herein. --Soman (talk) 16:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You suggest to keep this text because if we had internet back in the day the party existed then we would have had "a certain degree of notability". I'm sorry but this is an argument that has no basis in policy at all. Then, you state that the article's subject "represents a phenomenon of antifascist and nationalist articulation in the immediate post-war era". That may be so but where are the sources to back that up? We are not here to educate people politically. And Wikipedia is all about sources. It is not a historical website, nor a icollection of obscure information. -The Gnome (talk) 00:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete One factoid isn't enough for notability. No sourcing is an issue here. Oaktree b (talk) 15:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 04:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect. Sourcing is insufficient to meet WP:NORG. The name could be a useful redirect, however unfortunately I could not find a suitable target. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:32, 24 November 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.