Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egyptian Nazi Party

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. Most opinions here are in favour of deletion, with no coverage found since its formation. Michig (talk) 06:32, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian Nazi Party

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

This smells like a hoax. Seemingly, the evidence of the existence of the party is a facebook page (with 70 followers), which is the basis of the first reference, and an interview with 2 guys claiming to be running a party. For me, that fails the minimum criteria of WP:RS for a wiki article on a political party. Soman (talk) 15:28, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Egypt-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't understand the nom's rationale. The Egypt Independent is a reliable source which says: "A group of Egyptians have announced their intent to establish a Nazi party .. an independent Egyptian news website said on Wednesday. Al-Badeel, a leftist news portal, quoted founding member Emad Abdel Sattar as saying .." No "Facebook" there, rather Al-Badeel the source cited, but even if was Facebook who cares, many groups coalesced around Facebook it played an important role in the Arab Spring. Also Nazism is a well known and understood phenomenon in Egypt going back to WWII so it's not surprising to see it surface. The important thing for WP:NOTE is that this group has been discussed in multiple reliable sources such as Egypt Independent. They also appeared on Egyptian TV[1] as reported in The Blaze[2], The Jerusalem Post, Foreign Policy (paywall). However I'm not voting Keep since all the sources date to 2011, the formation announcement, and nothing since. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 01:13, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - With due respect to the nominator, I don't think "hoax" can be argued based upon the footnote showing from the Egypt Independent. That prospect out of the way, I'm in the favor of the lowest of low bars for articles on political parties, their leaders, and their youth sections (regardless of ideology) on the basis that this is the type of material that should be in a comprehensive encyclopedia. If no other reliable sources can be mustered, I'd still favor keeping under the policy of WP:IGNOREALLRULES (use common sense to improve the encyclopedia). I have a hunch that the nominator feels the same way and would ask that this nomination be withdrawn. Carrite (talk) 17:01, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm in the favor of the lowest of low bars for articles on political parties..." In that case all people would have to do is register a political party and WP would write an article on their views.. I'm thinking about starting the Teddy Bears for All party. Kitfoxxe (talk) 16:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete For reason noted in my comment above. The only sources are the initial announcement of the founding in 2011 and nothing since. As the nom rightly points out this could be two guys in a basement. It received news coverage because of its shocking nature. There is no evidence the group ever did anything other than announce existence. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 18:19, 12 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:59, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The only sources are interviews with party members talking about their party. No secondary coverage about the party and really no assertion of notability. Kitfoxxe (talk) 11:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Checked both Google and commercial databases - there is some discussion of this party forming (including on the Jerus Post), but nothing to indicate it ever did, or that is exists. Deathlibrarian (talk) 02:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Egypt Independent, cited as a source in the article, states explicitly Al-Masry Al-Youm could not verify the news reported by Al-Badeel. As for unverified Facebook tittle-tattle, it is best ignored. And the picture highlighting the story in Egypt Independent is of an incident in Spain. If anything, it calls into question its reasons for publicising the unverified report with the unrelated picture.-Zananiri (talk) 19:05, 14 October 2013 (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.