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. Malinaccier ( talk) 13:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC) reply

International Marxist Tendency (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

Revolutionary Communist International (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)

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

Despite attempts at improvement this article simply lacks any ability to establish its subject via sustained reporting via reliable, third party sources. All of the third-party RS that are currently on the article are simply in the History section and instead relate to the historical organisation Militant.

This means every source actually covering the RCI/IMT have been published by the group itself or relying on other primary sources written by its sections or former sections.

As a result, this article very much fails to demonstrate the meeting of GNG and should therefore be removed from main space, preferably with the contents being moved to draft in the hopes it'll be expanded in the future and the main space being redirected to Socialist Appeal (the only RS-compliant element of the RCI/IMT that exists on the English Wikipedia). Rambling Rambler ( talk) 11:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC) reply

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Rambling Rambler ( talk) 11:32, 11 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone ^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep, IMT has been a notable organization for long period. It had parliamentary representation in Pakistan for a while. -- Soman ( talk) 11:55, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep Although the article could possibly do with improvement, I think this is a significant grouping. PatGallacher ( talk) 15:05, 13 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep While I'm not a fan of the IMT/RCI, they are likely the largest Trotskyist international in the world at present so I think we'd be remiss to delete the article. It's one thing to monitor the article and make sure it avoids being promotional or self-laudatory but there is merit in having a neutral article. Also, one should be aware that counting attempts to delete the article under its former name, this is the fourth AFD in 12 years. Wellington Bay ( talk) 18:59, 15 June 2024 (UTC) reply
• Keep There's no shortage of obscure Trotskyist internationals that probably deserve to have their articles deleted, but this isn't one of them. IMT gets 168 results on Google Scholar, [1] which is clearly enough to show that it has received significant coverage. Don't get me wrong, this article has big problems with an excessive reliance on non-independent sources, but that's an argument for a rewrite, not deletion. -- Grnrchst ( talk) 15:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC) reply

Keep While there are an uncountable number of minor Trotskyist parties that do not deserve a spot on Wikipeida, the IMT/RCI is not one of them. The article currently has more than the required amount of verifiable sources, and as Grnrchst notes it has significant coverage. While there is room for improvement the article should not be deleted in its entirety. Additionally there have not been any significant changed in the article since the previous Deletion Nomination about three months ago, which was ruled a keep due to existing sources, potential new material, and material which had been removed by the previous nominator. Citrus Hemlock 02:15, 18 June 2024 (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.