Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Parliament election, 2019 (United Kingdom)


 * 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. Both sides have valid arguments: the event is likely not to take place, but sources about it exist.  Sandstein  09:28, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

European Parliament election, 2019 (United Kingdom)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Due to the farce that is Brexit, this election is almost certainly not going to happen, so its existence is a clear WP:CRYSTAL violation. I have no problem with it being restored if by some miracle the elections do happen, but for the meantime, it should be replaced by a redirect to European Parliament election, 2019, where it is explained several times that the UK is not electing any members (I had attempted to redirect it (and it was previously a redirect for over a year for the aforementioned reason), but this was reverted with a suggestion to go to AfD). Number  5  7  21:18, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP:CRYSTAL states that the event must be almost certain to take place, and Brexit casts a substantive doubt.  22:26, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 08:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 08:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 08:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete (or redirect). Government position is that this election won't happen. The European Parliament has also reduced and redistributed the seats for the next term of the parliament. --RaviC (talk) 16:14, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment There is enough RS material about the proposed election to satisfy the GNG, but WP:CRYSTAL is clear and policy. Perhaps material from this article could be moved to a section in Brexit with a redirect? It'd be nice if it was all in one place to link to from the European elections in the UK series. Ralbegen (talk) 19:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep As per this discussion. It was widely reported on 27 May 2018 that £829,000 had been set aside by the Electoral Commission for "activities relating to a European Parliamentary election in 2019. The lead section clearly states that the current status is cancelled, the lead section also clearly states: The Commission has described the money as a "precautionary measure, so that we have the necessary funds to deliver our functions at a European Parliamentary election, in the unlikely event that they do go ahead." It would actually be a breach of WP:CRYSTAL to delete the article on the basis that they definitely will not go ahead. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think that argument is backwards. WP:CRYSTAL requires certainty that it will go ahead, not certainty that it won't. Number   5  7  16:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * ...which is the problem. The article was restored when it emerged that £829,000 had been set aside to administer it. WP:CRYSTAL now requires certainty that it will not go ahead. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 09:28, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't. Number   5  7  11:19, 8 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Just out of curiosity which editors were notified as per WP:Articles for deletion, because I know I wasn't. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Editors would have been notified via the article alerts for the EU, Elections & Referendums and UK Politics WikiProjects. Or by seeing it on their watchlist. Number   5  7  16:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Only if they are getting alerts from those WikiProjects or have it on their watchlist. Neither of which I do. I just happened to click on the article and noticed the AfD on it. As per: WP:Articles for deletion#Notifying substantial contributors to the article: it is generally considered courteous to notify the good-faith creator and any main contributors of the articles that you are nominating for deletion.. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 01:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete the European Parliament announced in January 2018 that the UK's seats would be held in reserves or shared out. This, in my opinion, makes it clear that there are no scheduled European Elections in the United Kingdom in 2019. Therefore the article does not meet Wikipedia's criteria. Digestive Biscuit (talk) 22:36, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Quote from the article, which was written back in January: The remaining 27 British seats ought to be re-distributed among the 14 EU countries that are slightly under-represented, to even out current inequalities in their representation in the House, says the committee. "Ought to be", the lead section reflects this. The announcement of the £829,000 was made in May, and the EU Withdrawal bill has suffered 15 defeats in the House of Lords since.
 * Suggestion for closing admin: The situation is fluid. Parliamentary ping-pong is due to take place from 12 June to the end of the month on this. Leave this AfD open until after that process has taken place. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 10:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep We have articles when we have enough RS material to make an article. That's the basic principle behind AfDs. We have enough material, so we have an article. Re-title it "Possible election..." if you're worried about WP:CRYSTAL. Bondegezou (talk) 22:42, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:CRYSTAL: As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient. There is sufficient reliable source coverage to satisfy WP:GNG, and this is the most sensible place to include the material about e.g. set-aside funding. Ralbegen (talk) 16:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The probable non-election is already covered at European Parliament election, 2019 though, so there doesn't seem to be any justification in a separate sub-article saying the same thing. Number   5  7  18:02, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There is not as much detail there, but I personally wouldn't be averse to a merge outcome if that section could be expanded. Bondegezou (talk) 19:43, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I appreciate that there is material about the situation in the UK there, but I don't think that that's a justification for deletion of this article. Merging material there could work (and there's an solid overlap case), but I think keeping information in the European Parliament election, XXXX (United Kingdom) series is easier for readers. Ralbegen (talk) 20:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * For information purposes: The link to the date of the next election in the infobox of European Parliament election, 2014 (United Kingdom) was removed in this diff, April 2017. At that time the article European Parliament election, 2019 (United Kingdom) was a re-direct to European Parliament election, 2019, but with the link gone whatever info it contained was academic, at least as far as anyone accessing European Parliament election, 2014 (United Kingdom) was concerned. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 14:35, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I don't think that changes the point I was trying to make, though: the material should be included somewhere, and it may as well be in an article called European Parliament election, 2019 (United Kingdom). Ralbegen (talk) 16:28, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
 * My point was really regarding Number57. The link to the date of the next election in the infobox of European Parliament election, 2014 (United Kingdom) was removed as a tweak presumably on the reasonable rationale of "oh, that's just a sentence in the lead section of the European Parliament election, 2019, saying In February 2018, the European Parliament voted to decrease the number of MEPs from 751 to 705, after the United Kingdom withdraws from the European Union on the current schedule. - not worth keeping the link." I think there is less of a temptation to do that if the link goes to a full article. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 05:56, 10 June 2018 (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.