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. Ironholds (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2011 March 28. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

Second Revolution flag (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

It was literally only used at that one Scott Brown rally, and all coverage relates to that. The rest seems to be a possible advertisement for this tea party flag company. There has been no notable use, or even use as far as I can tell, outside of this one event. Yaksar (let's chat) 01:07, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment the last deletion discussion ended yesterday. Couldn't you wait a week until renominating? 65.95.14.96 (talk) 04:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Actually, I specified in the AfD WP:NPASR, meaning that the article could be speedily renominated. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:51, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete and Merge into American flag or Betsy Ross flag. Wikicopter _{what i do} s + c cup|former 17:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

*Merge, per WikiCopter, into American flag or Betsy Ross flag. Per nom., not notable enough to warrant its own article.--JayJasper (talk) 04:05, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• May I recommend a merge into Tea Party Movement or something along those lines? It seems a bit too trivial to merit mention in an article of such top importance as the American or Betsy Ross flag. But that's just my two cents.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - The purported activism flag itself has received little coverage in reliable sources and that coverage is not enought to meet WP:GNG and maintain a stand alone article. The topic could be about the Second American Revolution, but the defaced flag with the II in the canton doesn't call for a real revolution against the American government structure. The Second Revolution flag article tries to convey the flag as being political advertising for a candidate (Scott Brown) or a political party (the Tea Party/Republician Party), but neither the candidate or the party are behind the event and the event is out of their control (which means no merge or redirect to articles related to these topics). The events behind this Flag of the Second American Revolution up to now seem more about advertising an idea and an effort by salesman Jeff McQueen to brand his flag as a symbol that represents that idea so that he can sell these flags. Another example of a second revolution flag is here. This is nothing more than a non-Wikipedia notable Variations on flags of the United States. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Uzma Gamal. Non-notable.--JayJasper (talk) 18:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Uzma Gamal, too. B-Machine (talk) 04:41, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SporkBot (talk) 00:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator's note: I am reopening the debate for further comments, based on the outcome of my own deletion review. Mandsford 20:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge I searched the Proquest newspaper archive and found only a single, two-sentence long mention of it from April 2010. It does not appear to be notable.   Will Beback  talk  22:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I have added more refs, it has received the most press on two events the Scott Brown's victory party, and the National Tax Day Tea Party rallies on Tax Day. I also found it referred to as "Second Revolution flag", "II Revolution flag" and "New American flag"; "Second Revolution flag" has 13,000 google hits. However RS has not cover the flag alone that often. But other tea party rally articles often have images of it, as well youtube has several videos of it across the US at many different rallies.--Duchamps_comb MFA 00:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Meets both wp:notability and real world notability....keep if the main editors want to. Main editor has supplied a RS that specifically covers it and others that include it. Few would argue that there isn't more RS coverage of this out there. As a sidebar, has more real world notability than then subjects of about 1/2 of Wikipedia articles. Nevertheless, voluntarily merging it to the TPM article might be a good idea. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 22:31, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd actually oppose a merge of this into the main TPM article. Given the large scope this article covers, this is barely a blip on the radar, maybe part of a sentence in a section about the use of the gadsden flag, but I don't think more is needed.--Yaksar (let's chat) 23:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that it should be short (if merged). But the standards for weight/inclusion at the TPM article are already in the toilet, so nothing could make it any worse. There's a big section in there on one guy's twitter comment, and a 710 word section on an unsubstantiated claim that some unnamed person in a crowd made a racial insult. North8000 (talk) 23:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. But just because quality may be low, it doesn't mean we should lower our standards to the same level.--Yaksar (let's chat) 08:09, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep It does appear to be spreading, and this reference says the flag is "synonymous with Tea Party causes and events." --MelanieN (talk) 15:06, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "spreading", the refs that have been added are all the same as the ones from before the relisting and from the exact same time period, with the exact same issues that were objected to above. And, although it's unrelated to the AfD, I really think we should be taking phrases like "synonymous" with the tea party with a few grains of salt; you'd think something that is supposedly so prominent would be getting a bit more coverage.--Yaksar (let's chat) 20:03, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your assessment . It's all about news cycles and the protests/rallies. It will be in the news cycle again on the 15th Tax day. --Duchamps_comb MFA 23:38, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe. If it is and gets coverage that would very likely be evidence of enduring notability. But we certainly can't just assume that anything will happen.--Yaksar (let's chat) 01:24, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.