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 keep. (non-admin closure) -- Cheers, Riley Huntley (public) _talk 00:01, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh Socialist Republican Movement

[edit]

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

No indication of importance; doesn't appear to meet the notability guideline for organisations or the general notability guideline (contested speedy, prod) – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:59, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm struggling to find sources, which is perhaps unsurprising since this predates the popularity of the internet, and the best sources are likely to be in Welsh. See, however, Cymru Goch, which, oddly, our article also claims was the publisher of "Y Faner Goch" 79.123.57.130 (talk) 13:54, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might be able to stop struggling if you check out the Google Books results linked by the "find sources" template above. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:47, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I declined the CSD and PROD nomination. I've added four sources to the article; two of them are just passing mentions confirming some of the claims in the article, the others (published by the Welsh Y Lolfa) discuss the subject in detail. It is in my opinion enough to meet the WP:GNG requirements. I think we should keep this article, as the information represents an important piece in the mosaic of the Welsh nationalist politics. I admit, WSRM was a short-life movement, however, the information in our article is verifiable and may serve to political researchers in the future. I don't see any benefits for Wikipedia in deleting this kind of information. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 15:58, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep -- We have articles on a number of small left wing parties, so that I am not sure why this should not have one. Nevertheless, it must be on the margins of notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:44, 1 December 2012 (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.