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. (non-admin closure) Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 05:08, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unite the Right (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This article is about attempts to unite the Reform Party of Canada with the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. The topic is already covered under the Canadian Conservative Reform Alliance and Conservative Party of Canada. Also, it has very few references and is therefore largely original research. TFD (talk) 04:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment As far as I'm concerned, this was an attempt between the two parties of the time to gain more power in the parliament. It was a stratagem between the two parties so it would be hard to find references for nonmembers; unless references can be attributed to the claims in the article, it is all original research.Curb Chain (talk) 05:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• If the topic's already covered in other articles, then the answer would be to redirect or disambiguate. If we delete it, then we're leaving a redlink that encourages inexperienced users to fill this space with an article again and, where we already cover a topic, that's not what we want.—S Marshall T/C 11:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. As you say, parts of this effort are covered in articles on the four different parties involved (Reform, PC, Canadian Alliance, and CPC). I do think it is still useful to have this centralized page where the history of the entire effort can be outlined. Otherwise we'd need to tell the same story four times over in those party pages. I do agree it needs more references. There are certainly lots of references out there though, a newspaper archive search finds some 3,600 articles covering this issue. It was one of the central debates of Canadian politics in the decade from 1993 to 2003. - SimonP (talk) 16:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Simon do you think this is a candidate for a "reverse" WP:Summary style article? Lionel (talk) 18:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Encyclopedia-worthy topic, in my estimation. This National Post story is one of the many needles in the haystack. Keep it tagged for more sources, keep, improve. Carrite (talk) 20:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. — Baseball Watcher 22:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — Baseball Watcher 22:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - but only if substantially rewritten. Currently reads much like an essay I had to write in Grade 12 about uniting the right wing. (Which was 1997, a topical subject at the time) → ROUX ₪ 18:28, 4 June 2011 (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.