This article was nominated for deletion on 2 May 2019. The result of the discussion was keep.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon
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
The first iteration of the Oregon Progressive Party was formed in 1912 alongside the national Progressive Party by supporters of former President Theodore Roosevelt. The former Republicans never adopted a state platform and focused their effort on electing Roosevelt. However, he lost to Woodrow Wilson in the general election. Two years later, the party ran candidates for Governor and U.S. Senate, both of which lost. The party dissolved before the 1916 election.[1][2]
The 1912 party was part of the Progressive Party (United States, 1912). This party is not tied to that party at all, does not claim a common history, and wasn't even founded as the Progressive Party - it was founded as the Oregon Peace Party. There's no reason at all to mention it here, since it isn't the same party. Any useful information should go to the 1912 Progressive Party article; it serves no purpose here. If it's independently notable - which it doesn't appear it is - it should have its own article. ToaNidhiki0501:01, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Having two small articles on parties with the same name and similar politics doesn't make sense. Readers who visit the page may be interested in either the Oregon Progressive Party of the early 1900s or the current version, but splitting into different articles would decrease readability and decrease the quality of both articles.--TM02:01, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a valid reason to merge two unrelated parties a century apart into the same article. A better option might be to include a link at the top of the page directing people who care about the 1912 Oregon Progressive Party to the 1912 Progressive Party page. Also, I'm skeptical of the book sources: are these brief mentions or actual in-depth looks at this party? Simple brief mentions don't establish significant, non-trivial coverage. One source is actually a dissertation, which might or might not be a valid source. ToaNidhiki0502:10, 9 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
