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) Dea db eef 09:48, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Sex Party[edit]

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

Party only existed for a few years, never achieved over 1% of the vote in any riding, and references consist mostly of links to the party's website or financial reports from Elections BC. The party was mentioned in a few articles for local papers, but fails to meet notability threshold by and large. Thoughts? --4idaho (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Although most of the sources aren't linked, there is a very wide range of them, even when you discard the over-cited financial information and the several court cases. That looks like enough to establish notability. Dricherby (talk) 21:26, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. czar · · 01:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. czar · · 01:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. czar · · 01:24, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - According to WP:ORGDEPTH, and I would likely classify a minor political party as an organization, more or less, "Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability. On the other hand, attention solely from local media, or media of limited interest and circulation, is not an indication of notability; at least one regional, national, or international source is necessary." Some of the sources are newspapers and magazines from Vancouver, but also some in Toronto, showing attention from media across Canada. Given that it's quite well sourced and I would say meets the depth requirements to be an article on Wikipedia. Red Phoenix ^{build the future...}^{remember the past...} 01:34, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the article lists a good number of reliable secondary sources and notability is not temporary. Cavarrone (talk) 05:55, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep but definitely rename. The Australian Sex Party has a higher profile. Timrollpickering (talk) 16:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Renaming would be inappropriate unless there is some other, more prominent organization also called literally "The Sex Party". The Australian one is called "Australian Sex Party" so there's no clash, there. Dricherby (talk) 16:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Australian parties often stick "Australian"/"Australia" at one end of their name or other but are invariably referred to in running speech without it. "The" is in violation of WP:THE and doesn't clearly disambiguate. Try googling "The Sex Party" and see what comes up the most in politics. Timrollpickering (talk) 22:37, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - WP:THE is not violated if the "The" is a literal part of the organization's name, which it is in this case. In contrast, the Australian Sex Party is known as the Sex Party (small-t) so it would violate WP:THE to have its article at The Sex Party. However, to aid navigation, I've added a ((about)) tag to the top of The Sex Party pointing to the Australian Party. Dricherby (talk) 23:04, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The party ran in two elections, and the article passed a GA Review. 117Avenue (talk) 02:43, 14 May 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.