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 prior to merge. It seems to me that for the most part merging seems to be the favoured option. I will blank and redirect Student government political party and Student government party to Students' union for now. Anybody is then free to merge in the material from the Student government political party to any article(s) that they think is suitable. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 10:05, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Student government party[edit]

Student government party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Deprodded without rationale or improvement. Currently it is simply an editor's definition of a topic. Delete as per WP:NOTDIC. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Note The article creator has redirected Student government party to Student government political party, so I'm including the usual AfD search tags for that title too, for what it's worth. Exemplo347 (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Student government political party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:20, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete per nom (I would have tried an WP:A7 but no matter). Main article students' union makes no mention of them, except in the India section which mentions links to real political parties there. Created and de-prodded by a problematic editor, too, from what I can see. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:27, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • An impressive amount of work has been done and the potential is much greater than I had thought. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as a concept made up by the article creator. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:16, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete This happens only in Hollywood films as painful satire, not real life. Nate • (chatter) 21:40, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 April 2. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:53, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• keep as the article is greatly expanded from when it was nominated for deletion.--I'm on day 4 (talk) 02:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You've expanded it what you've decided are examples of the concept, but the sources don't use the term "student government political party", so I think we're drifting into original research. It's still a delete for me. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:30, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then we should rename it to the most appropriate title, and that solves the problem.--I'm on day 4 (talk) 23:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (including the Redirect) None of the sources refer to "Student government party" as a notable, separate entity. Exemplo347 (talk) 16:17, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I'm not voting yet to see how a few more days expansion looks. (This should have been a WP:DRAFT to avoid being judged in such an early state). So far, I think it's demonstrated the phenomenon exists, but not whether it's independently notable enough for a dedicated article. A section or integrated mention of it on Student governments in the United States would be a sensible alternative approach to consider. Mortee (talk) 17:10, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Searching "campus political party" finds other mentions. I listed a few (not necessarily reliable) sources on the talk page in case they help anyone. Mortee (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

If none of those sources explicitly reference "Student government party" or "Student government political party" then they're no good. We can't keep moving the goalposts here. You can't say "use this, it sounds like what the article might be about." Exemplo347 (talk) 23:39, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So rename it "campus political party".--I'm on day 4 (talk) 23:55, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's definitely not how Wikipedia works. You can't say "My article is wrong, let's keep changing titles until someone finds references that fit that title." My suggestion to you is to work on a draft in your sandbox and submit it through the Article for Creation process. This current article (and please don't move it again) has no place on Wikipedia because its subject matter does not meet the notability guidelines. Exemplo347 (talk) 00:09, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Insisting that the exact phrase be used is odd. Talking about "parties" in the context of "student government" e.g. here should be relevant. In any case, some do say "student government party": [1], [2], [3]. Again, I'm not saying these establish notability - none are treating the topic of these parties separate from particular examples. This might be best served by folding it in to another article and I'm witholding judgement for now. I do say though that these sources show this isn't "a concept made up by the article creator" as a previous commentor said. Mortee (talk) 00:13, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not odd to insist that an article should be about what it claims it's meant to be about. If it's the general concept of student government in the US, which is all it contains at the moment, then we have Student governments in the United States. If it's about student activism in general, we already have Student activism. We also have Students' union which includes sections on student bodies. So, tell me, what is this article going to add? Exemplo347 (talk) 00:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It would be about the phenomenon of political parties formed within student bodies for election to student governments, separate from student activism in general. It's possible for those to be referred to in sources without the specific substring "student government political parties". I haven't yet taken a view on whether this article should stand alone or be folded into Student governments in the United States Mortee (talk) 00:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Wikipedia's view is that there shouldn't be two articles covering the same subject matter. It's really simple, not something that requires "taking a view" - it's a straightforward policy - see WP:A10. Exemplo347 (talk) 00:26, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As with any subtopic, the question is whether there's enough to be said about this (parties in particular) that it can't be reasonably folded into the supertopic (student government). That's what I'm waiting to see as the article expands. I'll disengage from this for now and see how things stand in a few days. Mortee (talk) 00:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In case the article doesn't change in those few days, it's worth noting that Student governments in the United States doesn't use "party" or "parties" at all, so A10 doesn't apply and a merge (to some degree) would be better than a pure delete if the article itself doesn't stand, to cover the fact of these student government political parties existing. Mortee (talk) 01:05, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree merging would be better than deleting.--I'm on day 4 (talk) 10:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge or userfy - right now it's a total mess yet there appears to be a kernel worth saving. Bearian (talk) 18:03, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What does userfy mean?--I'm on day 4 (talk) 08:39, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as there are evidence that such a thing exists. In addition, Hong Kong's universities have a vibrant student government political party scene as well. Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 03:20, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think they were involved in the umbrella revolution, and some may have been in the high schools also.--I'm on day 4 (talk) 08:38, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge, but very carefully as it's a mess but has some potential merit (per Bearian, above). The subject exists - we call them "Factions" in Australia - although I doubt this is the best possible name for it, and most of the info probably belongs in articles about the individual student unions themselves. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:23, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No evidence that this is treated as a synthetic concept in any meaningful way in reliable sources, beyond discussion of individual student government parties. Or better yet move into Draft if author wants to try to find such sources. Martinp (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Some of this material can be used in Student governments in the United States, and some in articles about the individual student bodies mentioned, but I don't see any evidence that this is treated by sources as an independent topic. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:02, 11 April 2017 (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.