Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2023 Boise mayoral 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 no consensus‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  15:51, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

2023 Boise mayoral election

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The election is not notable and is of egligible importance.

The 2023 Boise election has not established individual notability for this election. The lack of reliable sources and sources overall are a by-product of this.

Even though there have been previous Boise elections, that does not automatically qualify the 2023 election to be so. It is possible that it may become notable in the WP:FUTURE but we have no way of knowing that. The election could be easily summarized as a section in Lauren McLean's article.

This project does not need an entire article dedicated to a non-noteworthy election. Grahaml35 (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 19:54, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:18, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep satisfies WP:CHRYSTAL as a future certain event of which there are SIGCOV RS, eg, , , . Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
 * None of these sources have a large following. It does not pass CRYSTAL as you are speculating and presuming that this will be notable due to these articles. The article is only of interest to small group of people. Grahaml35 (talk) 23:48, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Upcoming event that has significant coverage. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:FUTURE. Where's the coverage? Grahaml35 (talk) 02:46, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 20:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify Seems like a case of WP:TOOSOON. We can come back and check if the draft is worth publishing after the event. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:43, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep as per above and, further, I don't see the point in deleting a page now to re-create it in November. And it may be a container for important information that develops before the election without all the hurdle of re-creating the page. MaeseLeon (talk) 07:55, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Draftify (although from a personal level, reluctantly because I think local electoral coverage should be wider as I argued in my AfD example here) per the consensus established at the 2023 Carmel mayoral deletion discussion. Per WP:EVENTCRIT, the election hasn't established national coverage or any kind of lasting effect from it, and it is a routine mayoral election. We won't know if it will reach that threshold until after the election is finished, and can be re-created if it does, but for now, it fails to meet the mark. Nomader  ( talk ) 16:39, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Almost every election is by definition routine. The issue is not whether an election is routine, but whether it is notable, which is determined by sourcing. Further, one outcome of an AfD on a mayoral election is not a generalised consensus, especially given the difference in significance of a mayoral election in a state capital versus that of a peripheral municipality with less than half the population. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd argue that in this case, it's a routine re-election campaign and could easily be summarized in the incumbent Mayor's article at the present time -- it's probably as much WP:TOOSOON as much as WP:EVENTCRIT. If it receives national or international coverage, or becomes a competitive election with enduring significance, it should be recreated without prejudice (really should stress that the level for inclusion for this should be low -- even a little bit of coverage I think should meet the mark). Right now it's just routine local coverage of an election. Nomader  ( talk ) 20:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * @Goldsztajn There is nothing in the article to show any sort of notability. Grahaml35 (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The current state of the article has no bearing on notability; AfD is not cleanup. WP:NEXIST. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. There are plenty of in-depth sources, as noted above, for a state capital, and when we delete articles on elections, it results in the loss of articles that were, or could be, redirected. The danger is ultimately that there's information that ends up in endless loops of redirects and red links, which harms our core readership. Bearian (talk) 15:00, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I would hardly call Ballotpedia an in-depth source. Not to mention there are only three sources on the article. Grahaml35 (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.