Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Khmer Improvement 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 delete. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Khmer Improvement Party

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Khmer Improvement Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I believe this should be deleted on grounds of non-notability. This article seems to refer to a one-man, one-election party. I can find no other reference apart from the article cited, which was not so much about the Khmer Improvement Party as about it and similar such parties. There have been no significant additions to the text since the article was posted in 2009. Roundtheworld (talk) 15:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2020 July 27. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:33, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 16:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cambodia-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 16:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• Delete Wikipedia is not a Gazetteer of political parties. Article does not provide evidence for notability beyond existence, no achievements of note prior to, or during, an election campaign. Usefulness is not a valid reason to retain. doktorb _words^deeds 06:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
• Delete, article has only one source, meaning it fails WP:GNG, and it is also highly promotional. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

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.