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The result was Speedy keep – nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure).  --Lambiam 18:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

British National Party (disambiguation)[edit]

British National Party (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Unnecessary page as only the current party of this name has its own article, the three slightly obscure defunct parties of this name do not, they are dealt with in the article History of British fascism since 1945. PatGallacher (talk) 19:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. There should be some way for a user who ends up at the main article to find information on the smaller parties, even if they don't have articles. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:21, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • But surely there is, see the hatnote at British National Party. PatGallacher (talk) 21:27, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The three (well, two) redirects allow users to jump right to the sections in question. I personally find "...see British National Party (1942), British National Party (1960s), and British National Party (1982)" ungainly as a hatnote. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:31, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, on second thoughts I withdraw this nomination, although I think the article and the article on British fascism since 1945 could both do with some cleanup. PatGallacher (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's actually enough information on the first two (though not on the 1982 one) to split them off into small, stubby articles. That would make a dab page less questionable, as well. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:06, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note All but the 1982 installation had separate articles until User:Wipsenade suddenly decided to merge a bunch of articles into this one he created. Personally I cannot see why this was done and I can find no consensus discussion where it was agreed to merge all these articles, a lot of which I created. I for one would like to see them all restored and History of British fascism since 1945 cut back quite a bit to just give a basic overview rather than serve as a grand merger of a number of notable groups. Keresaspa (talk) 01:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep but not necessarily as-is. I agree that the recent changes have made navigation more difficult. If the merger sticks, then this page should probably be converted to a redirect. But given the age of the page and the complexity of the merger debate, the pagehistory should remain available as an aid to future editors. I have no strong opinion on the optimal redirect target, however. Rossami (talk) 03:34, 16 April 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.