Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Candidates of the next Western Australian general 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   keep. Daniel J. Leivick (talk) 04:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Candidates of the next Western Australian general election

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

The entire article is a crystal-ball exercise. The date for the election is not known, nominations are not open and much of the article (including the lists of MP not returning) is original research. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not an election guide. Mattinbgn\talk 22:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  -- Mattinbgn\talk 22:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree, everything in this article is likely to change once the election gets closer. In the meantime, it's all speculation really. Kevin (talk) 23:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep Firstly, it's a perfectly valid article, much like ones done for previous elections. e.g. Candidates of the Australian federal election, 2007; Candidates of the New South Wales legislative election, 2007; Candidates of the Victorian legislative election, 2006. Secondly, all the candidates listed from the three major parties are well sourced. All are listed on the party websites. See Candidates of the next Western Australian general election Bush shep (talk) 23:51, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment No spec at all - theyre up and running - current editions of the West Australian have all the labour endorsed candidates open to see SatuSuro 00:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I know what you are saying but none of them are nominees yet, they are endorsed prospective nominees and can't be nominees until they have submitted a nomination. There are 101 things that could happen between then and now.  I would suggest we leave election guides such as this to Antony Green who doesn't have the content restrictions that we have here. -- Mattinbgn\talk 00:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This is an absurdly tight standard you're trying to hold the article to. The close of nominations happens very late in the process and all these candidates will be out there campaigning long before that happens. Look at Gippsland by-election, 2008 where the formal close of nominations is still two weeks away. All the candidates listed have been preselected, exactly as the article states. If the parties happen to change their candidates over the next 6-12 months then the article will change accordingly. Bush shep (talk) 08:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep It's only a crystal ball if we speculate: posting reliable sources' projections of the future isn't a problem. Some parts of the article may need to be cleaned, and the article needs inline sourcing, but this is a reasonable topic right now because of the sources listed at the bottom of the page.  It's reasonable to assume that endorsed people will be candidates, since that's the point of the parties posting the pages that are used as sources.  Nyttend (talk) 01:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as an original research, crystal ball article. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 02:26, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's only crystal ballery if it's not sourced by reliable secondary sources. In this case, there is no speculation going on, it's merely reprinting what's already been said in credible sources.  User:Mattinbgn's points are noted and I appreciate the argument is a good one, but I don't see any problem with the article right now.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 08:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC).
 * Keep Everything in the article either is sourced or can be sourced (in particular the retiring MPs should each have inline citations) so is not a crystal ball violation. Davewild (talk) 17:41, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. All sourced, very useful article. Rebecca (talk) 03:23, 25 May 2008 (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.