Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Socialist Rifle Association

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was delete. There appears to be a rough consensus that the subject fails SIGCOV and ORGDEPTH. While the subject has been mentioned frequently none of the pro-keep comments offered evidence showing significant in depth coverage by multiple reliable sources. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:19, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Socialist Rifle Association

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG/WP:NCORP. Promotional. Kleuske (talk) 11:12, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 14:10, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While there appear to be a few news articles that mention this organization as involved in some events, there's no sources I could find that actually discuss this organization in depth and in detail. – FenixFeather ^{(talk)(Contribs)} 18:05, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While I have never heard of it before, it's a well referenced article and Google search shows 1,160,000 results.--RAF910 (talk) 18:43, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Quantity does not determine significance. It is the quality of the content that governs." from WP:ORGDEPTH, also, a lot of those hits go to pages discussing/mentioning the NRA and the word "socialist". Coolabahapple (talk) 02:06, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:56, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Besides local coverage (here and here), the organization was dragged (though slightly) into the Charlottesville racial incident. After it, the organization has been mentioned in The Guardian and in a recent academic book. That should be notability enough (WP:N). Rosario (talk) 05:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian says, Other groups who signed the decree include Pennsylvania Light Foot Militia, Virginia Minutemen Militia, American Freedom Keepers, American Warrior Revolution, Redneck Revolt, Vanguard America, Socialist Rifle Association and the Traditionalist Worker party. The Summer of Hate book similarly says, And there were many militias and paramilitary groups present in Charlottesville on August 12 - including the Socialist Rifle Association, the Virginia Minutemen Militia, the American Freedom Keepers, the Three Percenters, the American Warrior Revolution, and the left-leaning Redneck Revolt. These are what we call trivial mentions, and don't contribute to WP:N. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:52, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 19:15, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes WP:GNG and WP:N AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - doesn’t show any volume on Google Trends (use quotes to evaluate the phrase). References are just passing mentions. Jehochman ^Talk 00:13, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - New organization, founded in 2018. Consequently, there is bupkis out there for reliable sources. Fails GNG. Carrite (talk) 12:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP because this organization lacks enough WP:SIGCOV demonstrating it is a notable organization. A great many sources in the article are links to their own website or to Twitter, neither of which do anything to prove notability. The article also seems highly promotional and given that a significant amount of material in the article is material taken directly from the organization itself, it seems this article is serving little more then as free webhosting. I also disagree that Google search hits do anything to prove notability given the very easy confluence between this organization and with socialist and the National Rifle Association. Newshunter12 (talk) 05:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:NORG. Most of the sources are total garbage; their own website, twitter, youtube, etc. I spot-checked a few that looked promising. MintPress News has a passing mention. Free Press Houston is another passing mention. A splinter group which has existed for seven months; it would be extraordinary for them to have gotten enough coverage to pass WP:NORG, and the dearth of WP:RS backs that up. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:22, 28 October 2018 (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.