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 as semi speedy - snowball. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 19:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Team Murphy[edit]

Team Murphy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This is more or less a campaign page for a group of people running for the Federation of Young Republicans, not for any government office. None of the current candidates hold any political office. In essence, non-notable political ticket with a definite POV. I am not suggesting that the Young Republicans article be deleted, just this and individual pages for the various candidates. I'll be submitting those individually. Montco 00:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Scant Google hits. Definitely appears to be vanity. Aplomado ^talk 00:23, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Question for both this and the following AfD. I notice there's no article for this organization they belong to (Young Republican National Federation). As opposed to the generalized movement Young Republicans. Is this "YRNF" a notable group in it's own right by Wikipedia standards? My thought is if that question can be answered, the sub-questions of these articles should be simpler. -Markeer 00:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Depends on your standards. I wouldn't think so. You will probably have the odd mention of the organization in media outlets in connection with a national campaign. But they don't do any major advertising during campaigns, rather its an organization that provides volunteers during campaigns and perhaps raises some funds. Speaking for my own YR organization, the group is at rest in between elections, only really moving forward once the party has determined its candidates for the fall elections. Montco 00:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Young Republican National Federation is simply the national organization of the Young Republicans. It's not something different from them. --Metropolitan90 05:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete evidence suggests use of Wikipedia for raising the political profile of this organisation and of the individuals within it. This organisation fails WP:ORG, individuals fail WP:BIO; as per Metropolitan90 in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Audra Shay: "Running for, or even being elected to, an office within the youth division of a political party is not enough in itself to satisfy WP:BIO" — BillC ^talk 01:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Unverifiable, not notable or sourced, and putting ((future election in the United States)) on the article is simply ludicrous. --N Shar 02:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP:NOT a soapbox/webhost/vehicle-to-raise-your-organizations-profile. -- MarcoTolo 02:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete reads like an add. --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 02:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete it fails WP:BIO and I agree with User:BillC that it looks like an attempt to raise awareness of their organization per Wikipedia.--John Lake 03:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete clear attempt to use Wikipedia to gain notability, rather than vice-versa.--Aervanath 04:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No evidence of notability. No sources. --Shirahadasha 04:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for notability. Philippe Beaudette 04:21, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per so many reasons listed above. --Pigman^talk 05:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Running for, or even being elected to, an office within the youth division of a political party is not enough in itself to satisfy WP:BIO. --Metropolitan90 05:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Republicancruft. Philwelch 09:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, WP:CRUFT, WP:RS, WP:N. Terence Ong 10:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, per above. Mkdw^talk 11:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no second party sources, therefore fails WP:V Alf photoman 15:14, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• speedy delete I think we have consensus here. Cornell Rockey 15:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The article fails WP:NOT#SOAP and the article only has external links, no refs.Tellyaddict^{Editor review!} 16:23, 13 February 2007 (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.