Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Rhineland-Palatinate Cabinet Members

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. dbenbenn | talk 23:42, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

List of Rhineland-Palatinate Cabinet Members
Since this will change with every new election, there's little point in this list. And wikipedia is not a repository of exact members of each chosen cabinet everywhere through the world. Radiant! 12:38, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge. For reference, Rhineland-Palatinate is a state within Germany (a Bundesland), akin to a U.S. state or a Canadian province.  By population, it's about the size of Oregon or Kentucky.  From what I've seen, the trend is to keep articles about legislators at the national level, but it's a bit fuzzier for politicians working at lower levels.  Perhaps this list should be merged back into Rhineland-Palatinate&mdash;it's only nine people, that article doesn't seem to be overly bloated at the moment, and it's the only article that seems likely to link to it.  If something exciting happens there, then perhaps it can be broken out later as part of a Politics of Rhineland-Palatinate article. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 15:52, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that the people listed are notable, but the list itself is self-invalidating as per the next election. So I think there should not be such a list. Radiant! 16:26, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * An election only happens every five years, although there are probably periodic cabinet shuffles. An "As of the $MONTH $YEAR election, the cabinet consisted of" at the start of the list seems to be all that is required to warn that the information can date.  We have numerous articles on other political offices and officeholders that change on a regular or semi-regular basis, and it appears that this is a large enough region that someone will keep it updated. This is part of the reason I suggest a merger back to the main article&mdash;it will receive more traffic, and likely will be updated more punctually. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 17:30, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. Perfectly valid list. We have many articles that require periodic updating, this is not a reason for deletion. sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 16:49, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, I stand corrected. And I suppose a list is better than individual stubs for each member thereof. Radiant! 21:14, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, valid list, useful. Megan1967 23:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - nominator really needs to review Deletion policy and only nominate according to it - David Gerard 23:32, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * It is also policy to read a thread before you vote in it, and if you had read the discussion above you would have seen that I had already been persuaded to the other point of view. Radiant! 10:18, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems notable. JamesBurns 10:45, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.