Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canada and the 2004 U.S. presidential election

Canada and the 2004 U.S. presidential election
I wouldn't normally list such a long page on VfD, but I think that this page 1) Is unnecessary 2) Is so unencyclopedic, biased, and lacking NPOV that it's nearly unsalvageable, and 3) Could only be effective if placed in the context of the worldwide view of the upcoming election.

Consider the first sentence: "While the entire world is paying attention to the 2004 U.S. presidential election, no country is doing so more than Canada." Aside from the NPOV problems, a page on the Canadian view of the 2004 election is just too specialized to be effective.

Acegikmo1 22:00, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Abstain. It is, in large part, glaringly NPOV POV, but the comments about Canadian-resident US voters are probably worthwhile. Bits and pieces look mergeable, but I haven't a clue where they could go. --Aponar Kestrel (talk) 23:09, 2004 Sep 30 (UTC)
 * Do you mean 'glaringly POV'? --Saforrest 23:19, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * ... yes. Yes I do. --Aponar Kestrel (talk) 23:26, 2004 Sep 30 (UTC)
 * Keep. At present it is ridiculously POV and pro-Kerry (e.g. it does not even mention the various arguments made by Canadian newspapers against Kerry for his protectionist urges).  However, I think that the historical, linguistic and cultural connections between Canada and the U.S. are such that an article detailing Canada's specific response to the event deserves to exist.  The article is its present form sucks, but that's a reason to hack it up, not delete it. --Saforrest 23:17, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep improve if you find it deficient. By the way the article does mention Kerry's protectionism, and the first sentence is backed up by facts in the article. - SimonP 01:09, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Fix it, and keep it. CJCurrie 02:09, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it would be better named Candian views on the 2004 U.S. presidential election, since that it what it discusses. If the actions of the Canadian government or populace had an affect on the US election then perhaps this article could have the content the title promises.  That said, this article is going to be irrelevant in 2 months.  Delete Dsmdgold 03:08, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * To be fair, I haven't even read the article. But the US presidential election will have an effect in many other countries (UK, Australia, Iraq, as well as Canada), maybe there could be an article "International ramifications of the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election" (or similar) -- Chuq 03:47, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, or at least merge into an appropriate article in Category:Canada and the United States. This article is certain susceptible to POVness, but (1) we don't delete articles for being POV, and (2) IMHO, the author did an excellent job of just reporting the facts, ma'am. The article is reporting the fact that Canada is generally pro-Kerry; it's not advocating Kerry itself. Yes, it definitely could use some dissenting Canadian views, but that's no reason to delete. • Benc • 06:27, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete as unencyclopedic. This is a good start for a news article but an encyclopedia article should have some relevance across time.  I can not imagine anyone caring about this article in 10 weeks, much less 10 years. Rossami 03:26, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm a Canadian. I think the article is largely accurate, though it could be improved. I think it feels more POV than it is. It feels like the writter is soooo happy with the findings which is why it needs rewritting. But Wikipedia shouldn't have articles that are essentially only part of a breaking news story. Instead, some of this information should be put in other articles. Jallan 19:17, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Would Canada and the 1960 U.S. presidential election be encyclopedic? How long must one wait for an event not to be breaking news? - SimonP 01:59, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think this is an important article, and a correct one.  It is pretty much a fact:  Canadian polls support Kerry by a usual 3-1 margin over Bush, and the Liberal government doesn't have a full position, but would be helped by a Kerry win.  Some clean-ups could make it a very fine article, and a future article could include the result.Habsfannova
 * Delete. Whats next, one about Mexico? Cuba? Russia, Germany, France, Japan, Brazil? This is another case of  "I want to feel important" Canadians blowing our country's place in the world our of proportion. Pellaken 10:14, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't think this could ever be NPOV.  ~leif &#9786; HELO 08:25, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)