Talk:People's Assembly Against Austerity

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the People's Assembly Against Austerity article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

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

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Sociology: Social Movements Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the social movements task force.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 8 June 2013 by reviewer SarahStierch (talk · contribs).

Confirming notability

I've added a notability tag as I'm currently sceptical about the article's notability per WP:N. The guideline is well worth a read before commenting.

The article at present reads like original research, especially the sidebox and opening paragraph. Currently most existing sources are derived by people involved with the article's topic, and are therefore not reliable secondary sources. The only one that could not be described in this way would be the BBC article
There doesn't seem to be "significant coverage" about the topic. Not only do we need reliable and multiple sources, but also an indication that the topic is fundamentally noteworthy. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball (per WP:CRYSTAL) and shouldn't attempt to second-guess what may or may not turn out to be a significant campaign.
The BBC article seems to imply this is just a latest initiative of trade unions and other bodies. Rather than a stand-alone article it could be merged into an existing article, much like 2011 United Kingdom anti-austerity protests.
Per WP:PROMOTION and WP:SPIP, it feels like the article aims to promote and advertise upcoming events rather than report the facts (notwithstanding whether the facts are notable).

I am about to request subject experts to respond to this discussion in the hope of reaching broad consensus on this issue. We need to establish if it is notable enough to deserve its own article, whether it needs merging into an existing article if it doesn't, or if it isn't sufficiently notable, submit for deletion. --92.25.118.125 (talk) 19:10, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The points you have raised above unidentified user!!! are absolutely ridiculous and complete nonsense. Over 4000 people and delegates attended the inaugural People's Assembly conference in June 2013, and since then localized People's assemblies have been forming in towns and cities all over the UK. Quite contrary to your ludicrous assertion that the People's Assembly may not be notable enough, I am actually planning to make a wikipedia list page or pages for each local People's Assembly as each local group has it's own merits. Well at least you will have spurred me on to add lots more content to this page that will prove outright that it is ridiculous to put up the Notability tag on the page. Jimmy3d0 (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assemblies: A Clear and present danger

So, a protest group that is learning to use the internet to attract poplar interest and support. If the mass-meetings for Jeremy Corbyn were not bad enough, all this People Power needs to be stopped! Instead of wanting to get involve, have an impact or question the official line, people should just know their place and go back to watching soaps or sport.

But really, all this lack-of-notability claim seems to be little more than a smokescreen. Little more than a sub-text to have the article down-graded - ready for deletion? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.20.241.80 (talk) 20:35, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Improving this article

So I've started adding to this article and I wanted to initiate other editors to take part if they follow this page as it seems like this movement is getting a reboot of sorts. I've done some editing today to prepare its structure for more detail. If anyone finds any articles or other sources which talk about the People's Assembly and are useful but don't have the time to add them in can put them in the list currently hidden at the top of this page (underneath the headers). Particularly any sources which are newer, as a bulk of new sources are the Morning Star, not bad but not great by Wikipedia's standards of Reliable Sources. Jonjonjohny (talk) 14:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]