Deletion of Country Party of Australia (founded 2014)

Comment: Oh, someone is reviving the Country Party?  Again?  But this time, there is non-trivial coverage in reliable sources, so I view this as meeting the 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: The GNG is not a bright-line rule. Getting two or three news articles written about you online doesn't mean you're guaranteed a Wikipedia article forever and a day. So much is clear from the statement in  itself that the guideline establishes a ''presumption'' of notability. Not a ''guarantee''. Here, ''even if the presumption is established'', it is rebutted. It is rebutted by the fact that it is a micro-micro-party with no formal status and a handful of members. And that the media coverage of its inauguration was fleeting at best
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: I didn't !vote in the earlier discussion but I remember having a quick look at the article, and I would definitely have gone for deletion at that stage. The party certainly wouldn't pass any notability guidelines specific to political parties (no registration and no elections contested), but I think https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Country_Party_of_Australia_%28founded_2014%29&diff=648090977&oldid=648086940 BDD's work in expanding the article pushes it over the line when it comes to the GNG. Two non-trivial articles from the ABC, three of the same from ''The Land'', and one each from ''Queensland Country Life'' and ''Farm Weekly'' is a lot more than many AEC-registered parties, and definitely |significant coverage in my book. The ABC is definitely an , and I'd strongly argue the same of the three rural publications. I'm not a regular reader of them by any means, but I have come across them on several occasions (for Wikipedia and non-Wikipedia purposes), and I would suggest their quality meets or even exceeds the standards of the capital city dailies – they of course don't have the readership level, but they're on a completely different level to the free community rags you get in the metro area
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS)

Comment: Not notable. The candidates have less press coverage than I'd expect for an independent with any chance of getting elected. The group couldn't find enough people to nominate a group that Group voting ticket#2003 changes in NSW|gets an "above the line" box on the ballot paper so their How-To-Vote leaflet includes voting below-the-line for all of their candidates and at least one other to make a formal optional preferential vote. If they do pull a significant vote on Saturday (definitely if one is elected), I'm prepared to revisit this assessment; otherwise  to tell if they will ever become notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON)