Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ishema Party

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 keep. No prejudice to taking other courses of action after discussion and consensus on article's talk page, but the outcome of this AfD is definitely not delete. Kurykh (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ishema Party

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

Unsourced article on political party. Appears quite biased and more of a mission statement than an encyclopedic entry and in its current form it fails to pass WP:GNG. DrStrauss talk 10:42, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:12, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:13, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak Delete~~ - I think an article about Thomas Nahimana would be a better candidate, the party seems to mainly be a platform for his political ambitions. I'm not sure if the best choice would be to rename this article or to delete it and wait and see if a Nahimana article forms. Depending on the campaign running up to the August 2017 election, Nahimana and/or the party could become more significant figures, but who knows. Smmurphy^(Talk) 12:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
~~Move/redirect~~ to Thomas Nahimana, the article is much better now, but is about the primary figure in the party. Smmurphy^(Talk) 13:34, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Keep - Sorry to keep changing my !vote. I've only just started looking closer at the Nahima draft, and one of the sources (Rwanda: Le parti Ishema dévoile son programme à Bruxelles, Jambo News, May 16, 2013) is more about the Party itself and happens to be a few years old. I'll try to clean up the article from this source soon. Smmurphy^(Talk) 03:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, joe decker ^talk 02:48, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep - the article undoubtedly needs work, but AfD is not clean-up. I readily found three citations confirming the basics about the party and have added them to the article. Bondegezou (talk) 13:44, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - the article undoubtedly needs work, but the Kagame government of Rwanda has a history of supressing and attacking any information in any language that speaks in less than glowing terms about the current Rwanda government. Therefore, in the interest of providing information frequently not available, I urge that the article be improved or moved to one covering Thomas Nahimana. Girlgeek_z(talk) 21:52, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:35, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 04:10, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Bondegezou:, @Girlgeek z:, @Uwumuremyi:, Uwumuremyi, you have also created a page, Draft:Father Thomas Nahimana. Do you mind if I clean that page up and move it to userspace (I'll try to do it tomorrow)? Once that is done, I still think the Ishema Party page should be a redirect to the page on Nahimana, as there are not yet any sources that I've seen about the party itself and not about Nahimana. But, whatever the consensus is here, I wanted to point out the draft (and possibly soon article) on Nahimana. Smmurphy^(Talk) 02:20, 13 February 2017 (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.