Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Briton (2nd nomination)

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 Communist Party of Australia (1971). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:33, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Briton

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG - no significant coverage in third-party sources. Leader of a splinter group from another tiny unregistered political party. Article was deleted once before (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Briton) and has been re-created. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 11:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 11:30, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect After one ignores primary references, and closely aligned secondary references, I could not find anything at all to support GNG. Not notable in their own right. Redirect to Communist Party of Australia (1971) of which the subject was a member for 12 years, and which already ahs a paragraph about the subject. Probable search term. Aoziwe (talk) 12:31, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, without prejudice against recreation of a redirect from the redlink if desired. As always, being leader of a minor fringe political party is not an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL — a person in that boat can get into Wikipedia if they can be referenced well enough to clear WP:GNG, but does not get a free exemption from having to have any real notability-supporting sources just because he exists. But the footnotes here are all directly affiliated primary sources, not notability-supporting reliable source coverage, so nothing here is getting him over GNG. He's plausible enough of a search term that a redirect probably should exist — however, if there's going to be editwarring over this, then we should delete the article and then create a redirect, rather than leaving the edit history in place behind the redirect, so that there's nothing for editwarrers to revert. Bearcat (talk) 14:09, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Communist Party of Australia (1971) as stated above. Ideally, there would be a complete list of general secretaries in the article about the party. --Enos733 (talk) 18:17, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a non-notable leader of a small political party.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:12, 16 December 2019 (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.