ANTAURO: Coverage for this nascent political party seems to be all about Antauro Humala and not about the political party itself.  scope_creep Talk 16:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Antauro Humala due to lack of significant coverage of the party itself.  signed, Rosguill talk 16:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and Peru .  Shellwood ( talk ) 16:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I concur with the nom - there's not enough coverage of the party to warrant an article.  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The party is relevant, polling at a significant amount, and will only get more coverage as the election approaches.  Zellfire999 ( talk ) 01:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Those are not valid reasons to keep an article.  Either the subject passes our notability policies , or they don't.  This subject, at this time, does not.  - UtherSRG (talk) 01:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 02:03, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or possibly combine with Ethnocacerism per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang ( talk ) 22:02, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] This doesn't provide a valid reason either why it should be kept.  scope_creep Talk 15:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Sandstein 08:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A notable political force in the region.  -- Loewstisch ( talk ) 11:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Loewstisch : Have you references to prove it.  I would sincerely like to know for sure, because at the moment I don't.  To me it looks like a fringe party that has never held power and that make them non-notable, i.e. they are just another organisation.  I would like to be sure, because if it results in a no-consensus ! vote,  I'll likely send it back to Afd in a couple of weeks.  scope_creep Talk 14:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The keep ! votes in this discussion really haven't provided any compelling reason for this to be a separate article.  I checked Google News again this morning, and while there were a fair number of articles specifically about Antauro Humala , including one since the opening of this AfD ( [11] ), none of them devote significant coverage to the party ANTAURO as a distinct entity from Humala's political career.  signed, Rosguill talk 14:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks @ Rosguill : That makes it bit clearer.  I think now I would need to see definitive proof per WP:THREE that its absolutely notable.  Currently it seems to be almost nothing there, nothing.  scope_creep Talk 14:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The result seems to be a valid redirect by the look of it.  No compelling evidence of notablity has been offered in the almost four weeks has passed.  scope_creep Talk 14:19, 7 February 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: redirect