Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sun Ripened Warm Tomato Party (2nd nomination)

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 speedy keep per WP:SK#1. Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding delete !votes. The nomination has been withdrawn per the message from the nominator (User:JDDJS) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadly Serious Party, which states “I am taking a break. Any page that I nominated for deletion recently that does not have any delete votes and at least one keep vote can be closed as nomination withdrawn”. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:50, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sun Ripened Warm Tomato Party

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

Not a notable joke party. JDDJS (talk) 23:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

keep What are the criteria for notability of a joke political party? This party got just as much newspaper notice as most such parties ever get — a few mentions during each election campaign, as part of the lighter side of the campaign, or when they pull a particularly interesting stunt. But who has access to newspaper archives from the '80s to find the exact article references? That's not a reason to delete the article and pretend the party didn't exist or wasn't noted. The world didn't begin with the creation of online newspaper archives. -- 64.131.244.143 (talk) 23:50, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I would be arguing keep anyway, but this nomination has not even attempted to address the issues from the previous AfD (which, yes, was almost ten years ago, but still raises valid points). This one, which still has a degree of name recognition, has dedicated coverage, and continues to have a degree of significance. Frickeg (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Frickeg (talk) 02:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:52, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for the reasons noted above, as well as the electoral reforms that occurred as a result of their registration. The Drover's Wife (talk) 04:07, 23 May 2014 (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.