Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legislature of the Marshall Islands


 * 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The result was Keep - Nomination withdrawn (Non-administrator closing). --Tikiwont 12:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Legislature of the Marshall Islands

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This badly linked and superfluous article only repeates a few sentences from Politics_of_the_Marshall_Islands. Plus, a legislature of such small size and next to no international influence does not need a separate article. Targeman 03:26, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete concur with nom. If much more is added to it to justify a separate article from Politics_of_the_Marshall_Islands, it could change, but for now it's unneeded. JJL 03:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have pages for every national legislature in the world, regardless of what you perceive as its "international influence" or lack of. Expanding an article is much more useful than deleting it. —Sesel 04:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, and I'm all in favor of an egalitarian approach towards all countries, however small. But as long as there just isn't enough to write about politics in microstates such as RMI, maintaining separate articles all stating the same is making readers walk in circles. I say expand only when needed, because such inevitably long-term stubs don't look good and are simply not informative. --Targeman 04:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There is plenty of information. It takes effort to look for it, though. —Sesel 05:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Deleting national legislatures just because the country is small is a recipe for extreme systematic bias. The Marshall Islands is a sovereign nation, and the legislative bodies of sovereign nations deserve an article just as much as the UK parliament or US congress. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Article needs expanding but it would be bias if this was the only state on which we do not have an article on the legislature. Davewild 07:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * OK guys, you win. For the sake of consistency, let's keep this article. --Targeman 09:07, 20 June 2007 (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.