Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Democratic Socialists of America candidates election


 * 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 merge to Democratic Socialists of America. (non-admin closure) buidhe 15:29, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

2018 Democratic Socialists of America candidates election

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The Democratic Socialists of America is a non-profit organization, not a political party. It does not have candidates of its own. As such, this amounts to a list of endorsements of candidates by a particular organization. All of these candidates were endorsed by other organizations, often many others. I do not think Wikipedia should include lists of endorsements by the plethora of organizations which do so in any given election around the world. See Articles for deletion/Democratic Socialists of America candidates, 2018 election for the previous nomination. (Added after the first two responses as an addendum) Therefore, Wikipedia is not the home for a list of endorsed candidates by non-profit organizations. User:Namiba 17:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. User:Namiba 17:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. User:Namiba 17:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. User:Namiba 17:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep No policy argument was presented for deletion As it was covered by the media it meet WP:GNG--Shrike (talk) 19:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. This wasn't even an actual "election" — all it actually is, is a list of all the candidates that were endorsed by this organization in elections along with the status marker of whether they won or lost the elections they were actually running in. But the ones who did win are notable for holding office, not because of who did or didn't endorse them, and the ones who didn't win aren't notable at all, so this is really a list of people on a piece of biographical trivia that has nothing whatsovever to do with their notability or lack thereof. That's not a recipe for a list we need to keep, especially at a deliberately misleading title. Bearcat (talk) 21:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note I've explained my reasoning more specifically per the comment of user:Shrike.--User:Namiba 21:08, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


 * 'Merge to Democratic_Socialists_of_America or perhaps a reworked List of Democratic Socialists of America members who have held office in the United States. It gets to be too much of a directory to have a separate article listing the performances of endorsed or member candidates of an organization for each year. Reywas92Talk 22:26, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep and Rename to either 2018 Democratic Socialists of America candidates election results or List of 2018 Democratic Socialists of America candidates election results. article is noteworthy due to the media coverage that the organization and its members who ran as candidates received during the election cycle. the idea that because the DSA isn't a political party is doesn't hold ground by my estimation. but it should also be noted that it seems to be more of list article (which still is noteworthy) then just a purely information one. Epluribusunumyall (talk) 22:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge per Reywas92. Are we going to have lists for every labor union that endorses candidates? Candidates endorse by pro-choice/pro-life organizations? This will cause Wikipedia to devolve into a campaign literature stash. --Mpen320 (talk) 04:23, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Democratic Socialists of America, with the exception of the tables, and what amounts to a paragraph of information on state and local elections, that section already covers everything that this article says, and those items can be easily merged. While this content could potentially be notable, as being a member of the DSA is liable to get one more coverage than just being endorsed by a generic union, there is just not enough content to justify a split. Devonian Wombat (talk) 08:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.