Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of California Proposition 11 opponents


 * 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   delete. Stifle (talk) 15:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

California Proposition 11 lists

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

Listcruft. Indiscriminate collection of information. Surely this is published elsewhere and can be linked to? &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 02:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC) 
 * Delete as indiscriminate and unencyclopedic. Although it could be useful, wikipedia isn't the place for it. Tavix (talk) 13:34, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  TravellingCari  04:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete due to slipperly slope. This is a completely arbitrary list of people that some group thinks supports them. I have no idea what prop 11 is - but I know a bad article when I see one. --68.122.7.3 (talk) 06:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This list is a list of organizations (and opponents) of a major california ballot question.  Ballot questions live or die based on the organizations people trust support (for or against it).. This list of organizations would not fit on the main page as part of the article for obvious reasons.  The simple linking of a list off another site is a less then viable option due to the fact that the list changes daily.. and one source is not a complete list of the supporters.  The ballot commission does have an occasionally updated list of supporters that could be listed (and is referenced) however other additions from other places (press releases etc) should be added and referenced.  As election day on nov 4th is fast approaching it is best that this info (for or against) is known in a timely manner which the individual campaigns may be unable to accomplish  (california is a pretty big place..).  I would not support deleting this info at this time.. At least if a decision is to delete.. it should be held off until after november 4th, (when a list from one source is more stablized and likely not to change) as the list in question is definatly not Indiscriminate and is defiantly pertinent to the original article. Also the list is not arbitrary.. thats why we source things from original releases from the companies and any groups listed by the individual committes would not be up long if they were just "people that the group thinks supports them".  Organizations don't generally appreciate being labeled for or against a cause they are not.  -71.232.179.236 (talk) 08:34, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * So, to summarize what you are saying: This article is unverifiable by readers, contrary to our verifiability policy, because "the list changes daily", and is not here to be an encyclopaedia article but to be political advertising, that can be removed after a vote is concluded, in contravention of our Wikipedia is not a soapbox policy. You have successfully made a strong argument for deletion, in accordance with our deletion policy, no matter that you have prefixed it with the wrong boldfaced word.  Uncle G (talk) 14:44, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete The article's source can easily be linked to from the Proposition 11 article, as noted by the nom; lists of supporters and opponents is definitely listcruft. Nyttend (talk) 14:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete if it changes so frequently, it inherently fails WP:NOT. Jclemens (talk) 18:57, 6 October 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.