Deletion of Fifth International

Comment: It's a patent case of . It's also a case of mistakenly assuming that all uses of a phrase refer to the same topic, then trying to make an article out of novel synthesis of all that, a  violation, as well as a transgression of our principle that articles cover only one discrete topic and its subtopics. The only thing I would put in its place is a disambiguation page with entries like:* Fighting Fifth International, a 1938 proposal by POUM (Workers' Party of Marxist Unification)* Fifth International, a 1941 proposal by Argentine Troskyist QuebrachoAny sources cited should be worked into the pages to which these entries would link.  Any with no pages yet but for which we have a citation can either be used to create the pages in question if there's enough there, or at least noted for later use, on the talk page
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL||WP:NOR)

Comment: This article falls within the Guidelines of  as acceptable. From , "''Wikipedia is not a collection of'' '''unverifiable''' ''speculation. All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced.''" The history of the prior Internationals suggest it is merely a matter of time until the Fifth occurs.  The article is referenced, and is reporting discussion and arguments about the prospects for its success. I think that it is quite clear that Fifth International is a topic that is specifically allowed under 's policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)