Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Endorsements in the Greek bailout referendum, 2015


 * 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. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:10, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Endorsements in the Greek bailout referendum, 2015

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I think this will be a non-ending story of a list with no indiscrimination. Some part could be merged to the main article. For instance, the list of parties that officially stated that support Yes or No after an official request by the government before the referendum. A list of people, inside or outside Greek, that support Yes or No can't be complete. Magioladitis (talk) 17:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep: Unambiguously meets WP:GNG. Reasons given for deletion are spurious and non-existent. Highly notable to include economists, politicians, organisations, etc that took a view on a matter of international importance. Cannot see the difference between List of Barack Obama presidential campaign endorsements, 2012 (one exists for Romney as well) or Newspaper endorsements in the United States presidential election, 2012. Can these ever be complete? This nomination is another example of WP:GEOBIAS AusLondonder (talk) 17:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Can I suggest you read Speedy Keep? It's not for articles that are 'unambiguously notable', it's for nominations that are clearly disruptive or procedurally flawed. None of the grounds for 'Speedy Keep' listed there apply here. Robofish (talk) 22:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep:so far I have only spotted a problem with a porn actress included (added twice). No reason to throw the baby away with the bathwater.Dorpater (talk) 18:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I do not say that the entire list is not needed. There was an official procedure of endorsements where parties and mass organizations participated. All other names in the list are expressed opinions but not official endorsements. The official part can be included in the main article. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep: Concur with AusLondoner. I'd say that a notable person/organisation's "expressed opinion" is the same as an "endorsement" as long as it suggests that one option is preferable to the other. Anywikiuser (talk) 19:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, as a notable and important list. I would personally like to see it limited to individuals and organisations based in Greece, though, rather than mentioning the opinions of those from other countries; it doesn't seem very relevant to me what various British people said about the referendum. Then again, I've just looked up List of endorsements in the Scottish independence referendum, 2014 and that list includes people from across the world (and is also far, far longer than this one) so I guess precedent is against me there. Robofish (talk) 22:47, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, as WP has no space restriction and readers can get a quick glance at who is on each side. But also keep what people from other countries said, as there is no harm in giving readers more information, and any one who does not want to read something can always skip that part. Agree there is GEOBIAS in WP, but what has that got to do here? 117.221.179.163 (talk) 06:22, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:SNOW. Endorsements really mattered in what Joe Biden would have called a "big deal". Bearian (talk) 21:05, 10 July 2015 (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.