Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solidarity unionism: Difference between revisions
→Solidarity unionism: Keep. |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*'''Keep''' clearly notable given all the Google news hits [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=10&q=%22Solidarity+unionism&um=1] , Google books hits [http://books.google.com/books?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=10&q=%22Solidarity%20unionism&um=1&sa=N&tab=np] and Google scholar hits [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=10&q=%22Solidarity%20unionism&um=1&sa=N&tab=ps]. Way to go Guy, block someone then nominate an article they created for deletion. There are words to describe people like you Guy only they violate Wikipedia policies. RMHED[[Special:Contributions/RMHED|<font color="black">.</font>]] 20:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' clearly notable given all the Google news hits [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=10&q=%22Solidarity+unionism&um=1] , Google books hits [http://books.google.com/books?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=10&q=%22Solidarity%20unionism&um=1&sa=N&tab=np] and Google scholar hits [http://scholar.google.com/scholar?pz=1&ned=us&hl=en&num=10&q=%22Solidarity%20unionism&um=1&sa=N&tab=ps]. Way to go Guy, block someone then nominate an article they created for deletion. There are words to describe people like you Guy only they violate Wikipedia policies. RMHED[[Special:Contributions/RMHED|<font color="black">.</font>]] 20:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' per the rich mines of references that RMHED found. [[User:Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth|Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth]] ([[User talk:Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth|talk]]) 20:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' per the rich mines of references that RMHED found. [[User:Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth|Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth]] ([[User talk:Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth|talk]]) 20:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' Ditto what they said. --[[User:Nikolaus maack|Nik]] ([[User talk:Nikolaus maack|talk]]) 02:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 02:23, 7 February 2009
- Solidarity unionism (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
This article has been around for a couple of years, and has been tagged as needing better references for most of that time. Two references are cited, one of which is to a news story which mentions the term once in connection with the Starbucks dispute, the other does not mention it at all. Google shows few hits. This appears to be a neologism which has failed to gain significant currency despite its promulgation via Wikipedia. The creator is evidently a political activist of some kind, his user name is "Smash The State", and a lot of his edits show signs of that agenda. It is possible that a suitable merge target may exist, but it's not entirely obvious to me where it should go. The small footprint on Google, mainly polemic, self-published material and passing mentions, does not encourage me to believe that this is a fixable article but I have been wrong before. Guy (Help!) 20:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep clearly notable given all the Google news hits [1] , Google books hits [2] and Google scholar hits [3]. Way to go Guy, block someone then nominate an article they created for deletion. There are words to describe people like you Guy only they violate Wikipedia policies. RMHED. 20:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep per the rich mines of references that RMHED found. Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 20:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Keep Ditto what they said. --Nik (talk) 02:23, 7 February 2009 (UTC)