This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. Stancel 21:25, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable. - Stancel 15:47, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator did not submit this to the VfD page. Although my vote is to keep, I will now. Samaritan 23:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article and VfD moved from Prince Edward Island Draft Beer Party to Draft Beer Party. Samaritan 09:06, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: What is your point? There is no consensus that "notability" should be a criterion for inclusion. See Jimbo Wales' view on notability. He expressed this view in the poll where notability failed to become an accepted reason for deletion. It is verfiable -- the information comes from the PEI government. It is not vanity. The article is written by and large in a Wikipedia style. It is linked from other related articles. Could you provide some valid reason for wanting to delete this article? Ground Zero 20:59, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per Ground Zero. --Spinboy 21:20, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. A political party on the ballot for a senior level of government. The Polish Beer-Lovers' Party became a genuine political force, winning 16 seats in the Sejm in the 1990s (before splitting into "Big Beer" and "Small Beer" factions). It's quite interesting to know they weren't the first party to run on such a program (apparently - organic expansion is our friend). See also Marijuana Party, List of frivolous political parties. Samaritan 21:23, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. "The Draft Beer Party ran in only the 1979, and ran only a single candidate". Come on! IF they continued to run candidates and had become some sort of viable force, then, okay, yeah, maybe. But that is not what happened, and they no longer exist. RickK 21:37, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • I agree with you Rick, that the party was a small and short-lived venture in a small political jurisdiction. But why isn't there room for an article about them? What will be lost if the article remains? We know what will be lost if the article is deleted -- a little bit of information that is difficult to find elsewhere. One hopes that in time someone who remembers the PEIDBP will add more information. It probably won't happen, though, if there's no article. Ground Zero 22:47, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • A noncopyvio deleted article would stay on the Wikimedia Foundation's hard drives anyway, just without public access. And about the only bandwidth this would use up would be people looking up the party, and eventually some of them would know more ("It arose after a controversial change to the province's Liquor License Act led to the closure of the province's last local beer plant..." or not. But without finding the sources ourselves we'd not otherwise know.) Samaritan 23:08, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • So we're supposed to have an article on every so-called political party who has ever run so much as one candidate for any national office in any country in the world? RickK 23:17, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
    • In a word, yes. --Gene_poole 01:01, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. And what harm is done if there is an article on every political party that has ever run a candidate in any national election? It might not be the most important piece of information, but is there any reason not to include every political party ever, regardless of how minor? R Calvete 23:32, 2005 May 3 (UTC)

• I had nominated this, but then I changed my mind after hearing GroundZero's defense of this article. I tried to un-nominate it but I guess somebody re-nominated it. So I now vote Keep. - Stancel 20:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep all registered political parties, no matter how small or silly.--Gene_poole 01:01, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unverifiable and possible hoax. Only 10 Google hits, most of which seem to be WP mirrors. The article provides no external evidence proving there ever was such a party. Inclusionists would do well to remember that just because somebody writes an article about something doesn't mean it's real. --Angr/_comhrá 02:25, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did you overload the search? If you just search for "draft beer party" you'll come across this link: [1] R Calvete 02:32, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
• Keep all verifiable political parties. - SimonP 03:51, May 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Vote Miller for president of Beer !!! Klonimus 05:09, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete a one-off one-man political "party" that wasnt even running for a national office. Keeping this would set a bad precedent. Megan1967 05:43, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as above; but wants expanding -- context, outline platform, leader, reason for extinction --Simon Cursitor 07:03, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. While I sympathize with the delete votes, people researching Canadian elections would need to look this up, this is wikipedia's job. Kappa 07:10, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Has anyone bothered to check if this is actually true? In any case, this is a one off party for a single failed candidate who doesn't have his own article. Amusing, but astoundingly non-notable. We shouldn't have articles for things which at best only deserve a one line mention in larger articles. If we must keep it, stick it in the trivia section for an article on that year's election. Gamaliel 07:13, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you read above, you will find that R Calvete seems to have verified it. Kappa 07:22, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• I found another link: [2] It says that Campbell received 200 votes. I'll add this to the article. I just added that he was running for the office of Assemblyman. Stancel 20:09 4 May 2005 (UTC)
  • I also added that he lost to James Matthew Lee. Stancel 20:21 4 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep it's history and should be kept. It makes a good example of frivolous political parties. --Vsb 08:17, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• keep Yuckfoo 23:30, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per SimonP and Ground Zero. Leithp 09:11, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.