Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Movement for the Confederation of the Communists
: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.
=[[:Movement for the Confederation of the Communists]]=
:{{la|1=Movement for the Confederation of the Communists}} – (
:({{Find sources AFD|title=Movement for the Confederation of the Communists}})
Practically unknown communist organization, absent from the sources. It ran in the Italian general elections in 2001 in Tuscany, with poor results. It doesn't seem to meet WP:GNG. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 09:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The best thing I can find is [https://www.google.de/books/edition/La_diaspora_del_comunismo_italiano/xsVJDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Movimento+per+la+Confederazione+dei+Comunisti%22&pg=PA110&printsec=frontcover this], and although I can't read Italian, I think that's not much. Link in the article currently is perma-dead, website of the organization seems to be last updated in 2001. --LordPeterII (talk) 09:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 10:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. There is plenty of sources and more than 700 [https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=%22Movimento+per+la+Confederazione+dei+Comunisti%22 Google Hits] on this party, that deserves an article in Wikipedia. --Checco (talk) 18:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
::Rather than using Google hits as the only reason for keeping the page (and indeed it is not a valid motivation for keeping the page) why don't you try to explain why this party has encyclopedic relevance?--Scia Della Cometa (talk) 19:26, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
:*@{{u|Checco}} Google hits are no indication of notability. We would need the sources you mention, can you provide specific links? I could find passing mentions as well that the party existed, but we need reliable, independent and significant coverage. --LordPeterII (talk) 20:03, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as it does not meet WP:GNG. Currently the article is unsourced. Yakme (talk) 09:23, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
{{clear}}
: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.