Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Party for Socialism and Liberation

message: Comments to the Admin Closing this discussion.  I know that easiest thing to do when an AfD has a majority of users expressing a desire one way but some users going the other way is to close with a “No Consensus” result.  Currently 7 users express Delete opinion and 8 express “Keep” opinion.  I would encourage the closing Admin to consider the following:
The nominator of this AfD, an anon IP User:68.161.73.206 has a total of 25 edits, 24 relating to the deletion of  this article, the one unrelated edit was a minor edit removing a link from an article. See the users contribs. This user placed the prod tag on the article  5 times after removal by other editors, requiring an Admin to admonish the user.  See this entry.
One Delete opinion, was expressed by User:SetoffFive who prior to today has a total of 5 edits, 3 concerning the deletion of this article, the other 2 seeking to Delete other articles concerning left wing political parties. See the users contribs. In the last few hours this user has truncated the article, seemingly to weaken it in the AfD discussion and has attempted to get an Admin to close the AfD.
Another anon IP User:72.80.242.153 has a total of 6 edits, all related to deleting this article, including 4 posting to a properly perplexed admin, (see this entry), asking that the AfD be closed out immediately as "Delete" only two days after the AfD opened.  See the users contribs.
The other Delete users, all dedicated, honest Wikipedians, raised valid concerns relating to the need to demonstrate notability, eliminate self promotion and to provide proper sources.  The article has since been edited and improved to address these concerns. It now clearly states he groups notable role in the ANSWER coalition and the anti-war movement.  Additionally the group has a unique position in the American left based on its collaboration with Muslim and Arab American groups.  The article, once without outside sources now provides 4 verifiable sources supporting this notability.
I would ask the closing Adim on the AfD to find consensus for “Keep”. rather than “No Consensus.”  This reflects the true consenus of this AfD.  Otherwise the article will likely face another round of ill founded Prod-Speedy Delete-AfD’s (as is happening here) by users not concerned with the article’s lack of content but, for whatever reason they only know, the desire to suppress content.Edivorce 13:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

message: A reason to keep an article should not be based on what user have nominated to delete the article but rather on the criteria and rules Wikipedia has. This article has violated many of Wikipedia's rule. Wikipedia is not a soapbox is one of the main reason this article should be deleted. It also has been read like an advertisement for the group and has some serious POV issue. The website that the article it sources is not notable and nor is the group notable to have an article of its own. It does not meet the notability requirements and is very unencyclopedia. Remember Wikipedia is not a democracy and its rule should be followed. SetofFive 14:45, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment to the Admin