Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of Australian and Canadian governments


 * 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 Australia–Canada relations. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 01:23, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Comparison of Australian and Canadian governments

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This page is essentially an essay better suited to a dissertation than an encyclopedia. Either it simply duplicates the content of the extensive articles on each country's system of government (which means it is redundant), or it compares from a non-neutral standpoint, making value judgements and tending towards a conclusion (which means it is biased and POV). Wikipedia is not a political consultancy, nor is it a game of Top Trumps. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  directorate  ─╢ 13:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Not quite the same as the comparison of presidential candidates' positions in 2008, the article below this one. This is a very interesting essay, which is true about a lot of original synthesis.  However, almost anything can be compared and contrasted with anything else, and to have a comparison between the governments of Australia and Canada is to open the door to the same type of comparison between any other two governments-- U.S. and Canada, Canada and Britain, Britain and France, France and Haiti, Haiti and Pakistan, etc.  I think the author has some valuable insights, and can make contributions to the separate articles about the governmental systems in both nations.  I'd support an article about comparison of multiple nations within the British Commonwealth, but "Nation x and Nation y" are often examined for the precedent that they set. Mandsford (talk) 15:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Again, I disagree with the assertion that this cannot be a topic for both an encyclopedia article and a dissertation/essay. Although there are obvious problems with the article, and much of it may be "original synthesis" as Mandsford pointed out, comparative government articles themselves are hardly WP:OR by their nature. Comparisons like this one, comparing major world governments, are deserving of an article. This article can certainly be improved, and the case for deletion has not been made in my opinion. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 21:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * But then we start drawing a line, if this is all right as long it involves "major world governments", but not all right if it involves "lesser" nations.  Ideally, someone should compare the information from the separate articles about Australia and Canada, and draw his or her own conclusions.  Mandsford (talk) 23:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment for Mandsford or anyone else seeking deletion: I disagree strongly with the proposition that there's no way to draw a line between notable comparisons between major governments and non-notable comparisons between minor governments. We already make that distinction regularly for articles on diplomatic relations between various pairs of sovereign nations. If it was so problematic to determine which were notable and which weren't, we wouldn't keep Australia–Canada relations and delete Iraq-Malta relations (and yes, the latter article did exist before it was successfully AfD'd with my support. For the record, I wouldn't support an article comparing the Iraqi and Maltese governments! A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 20:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  —Grahame (talk) 01:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge somewhere Needs a trimming perhaps. But seems worth including. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge anything that isn't a synthesis of information to Australia–Canada relations. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC).
 * Merge per Lankiveil. Incidentally there are journal articles and at least one book floating around on this exact topic, but I'm not sure that such would be a sound basis for an article. Orderinchaos 16:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - this article as written is rather weak. However, the use of comparision in poltical science, history, and other academic disciplines is a standard method.  Perhaps what we need instead is an aticle about the academic comparision of countries, rather that an actual comparison.  Would the deletists in this debate settle for that? --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 22:29, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * We have one. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  without portfolio  ─╢ 05:53, 16 October 2009 (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.