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. j⚛e decker ^talk 19:02, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

National British Resistance

[edit]

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

This was PROD tagged earlier, the PROD was then deleted by an IP editor without comments or improvements. Neither the PROD-er nor I could find any evidence of significant coverage of this party in reliable sources, therefore notability has not been demonstrated to Wikipedia's standards. Delete. Cheers, Dawn Bard (talk) 00:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As original PRODder. ... discospinster _talk 03:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:26, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:26, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: clearly insignificant. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: no significant sources and more seems to be "promoting" the career of it's founder and his frequent court appearances. Nthep (talk) 20:28, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

keep This is clearly a new political party and is building in momentum. If we delete this article today then we will be building another one in a few months. Needs a few adjustments perhaps but it makes sense to keep it— Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.65.56.4 (talk) — 79.65.56.4 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete per nominator and above comments; no indication given of notability or significance. 331dot (talk) 17:07, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. - Cwobeel (talk) 22:43, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Cannot find evidence of anything more than 3 members and the "founder" is merely a notorioux hoaxer / troll who appears to have created this page to gain attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RibbyKennedy (talk • contribs) 19:33, August 26, 2014‎
- RibbyKennedy is a WP:SPA created just minutes before this edit. Meters (talk) 19:58, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on notability grounds. Not a registered party so little more reason to keep this than anyone else's webpage. Note that the article's claim that the group only has three members failed verification of the cited source. They may indeed only have 3 members, but they may also have more. Meters (talk) 20:04, 26 August 2014 (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.