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, but moved to Welsh independence --Steve _(Stephen) ^talk 09:16, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welsh Independence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

A stub for a principal that is already explictly mentioned in Plaid Cymru - Party of Wales article already. This article, at this state, serves only to explictly state the goal of the Party of Wales, advocating Welsh independence - violating NPOV already. Granted that a well-rounded article may potentially develop, I previously nominated this article be speedily deleted in March 2007 under CSD - but withdrew the notice after the article creator cited natural article growth for keeping it. Since that time, this stub continues to provide little to no encyclopedic value, that otherwise couldn't be found in other articles. Wikipedia should not be used to progress political agendas. If the intent of this article is to create an informed article on Welsh Independance, then may I suggest a new section in the Plaid Cymru article - as is the case with Quebec independence in Canada Luke! 03:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• support creation of new section withing Plaid Cymru per nom. Chris 06:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep no reason to delete this. Notable concept - the stub can grow.-Doc^g 13:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete & merge into Plaid Cymru if appropriate. As nominator states, we're not a place to promote political ideas. /Blaxthos 16:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep, but move to Welsh independence. The suggestion of a merger would be perfectly valid if Plaid Cymru was the only group advocating Welsh independence. However, this is not the case - other political groups and parties also favour Welsh independence, and quite a number vocally oppose it. As such, this article can be expanded quite considerably and certainly does not belong as a section in an article on only one - albeit the most vocal - party which advocates Welsh Independence. What's more, there is a long history of calls for Welsh independence - longer than the history of Plaid Cymru. This too could be amalgamated into this article. I note that the comparison given in the nomination is also flawed - Quebec independence is not a subsection of the page of the Parti Québecois - it is a subsection on the article for Quebec itself, and also represented by the articles Quebec nationalism and Quebec sovereignty movement. If it were to bve merged anywhere, Welsh nationalism would be a far better target. A far fairer comparison would be the lengthy and encyclopaedic article on Scottish independence, It may be a stub now, but there is no reason to suggest that this article could not grow to far more than that - and now that it is actually stubbed as a {{Wales-stub}} it might. Grutness...wha? 07:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Notable concept, politically and historically (see e.g. [1]). The article can and should be expanded. Stammer 09:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep I noticed an anti-nationalist comment on the Wales discussion page, it is wrong to play "Bash the Nationalists" on Wikipedia. This article isn't even POV I don't think. Yeah, a strong keep it is! Amlder20 22:50, 12 May 2007 (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.