Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New York Federalist 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 redirect to David Bellavia. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:47, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New York Federalist Party

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

This is not a real political party, but rather was a one-off, self-created ballot line proposed for one candidate's run in one special election. And since an insufficient number of signatures were gained, this "party" never appeared on any ballot. See this YNN story for the best explanation. There are no reliable sources that point to this party having any existence outside of this one non-candidacy, and it has no web page, no Facebook page, no nothing. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - one-candidate party which never got onto the ballot. Only one brief article partially about it. Does not meet WP:ORG. Will Beback talk 01:37, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Above it says all there is to say. Kraxler (talk) 01:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to David Bellavia. Just some guy's creation. Neutrality^talk 09:10, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — Osubuckeyeguy (talk) 15:12, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to David Bellavia. Non-notable, fails WP:ORG--JayJasper (talk) 21:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Violation of WP:ORG--Harizotoh9 (talk) 12:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

that is not a speedy criterion, and I have declined the speedy request. The relevant criterion is not indication of plausible importance, a much weaker criterion than actual notability , and actual notability is for decision here in the usual way. DGG ( talk ) 19:14, 6 October 2011 (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.