 | This article was nominated for deletion on March 28, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Is there a reason that you moved this back to a Hebrew transliteration from the English term given on their website, "Socialist Struggle"? TewfikTalk 03:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Tewfik: I would like to ask you why you moved the article minutes before nominating it for deletion? Like the Knesset the Histadruth or the Likud, Maavak Sozialisti is known by its hebrew name. But if you want the article deleted anyway, why do care under what name it is deleted? Your move makes it hard to see the article history or google for more references. ابو علي (Abu Ali) 08:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
My move makes it hard to see the article history or Google for references? How so? You do realise that the history is not altered other than to reflect a new edit. I don't want to delete the article per se, but to examine whether it meets WP:ORG or not. TewfikTalk 19:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- Well if you google Maavak Sozialisti, you will get mainly relevant information about the organisation. Wereas if you google Socialist Struggle you will get mainly irrelevant stuff. Should the the "Socialist Struggle" article be deleted? Why not, I never heard of them. But should maavak Sozialisti be deleted? Of course not, they are the largest most active and most notable Trotskist organisation operating in Israel now and the only left organisation which has succeeded in building a base amoungst working class jewish Israelis. But as you said on the deletion page, lets focus on notability, and if we decide that the article is notable, we can discuss whether a move is a good idea. So on the question of notability: Can I ask you once again whether this article in Haaretz [1] fulfils the requirement for notability? Thanks, ابو علي (Abu Ali) 19:49, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: your message, I thought that I had left word on all the proper places that by notability I meant WP:ORG. Just in case I wasn't clear, there need to be multiple nontrivial sources. The Haaretz piece you found is a good sign, but you'll need at least one more nontrivial source. Look at this as an opportunity to improve the article. TewfikTalk 02:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)