Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of liberal cities

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was - Deleted --User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 09:39, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

List of liberal cities
Can't see how this can be made encyclopaedic. How does a city get itself classed as 'liberal' or 'conservative'? I think this list is somewhat pointless. Dbiv 19:34, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless a verifiable, objective citation is provided justifying the classification of each city on the list. If kept, the two lists should be merged into one. A single list of cities ranked by some reasonably objective and verifiable metric, such as the percentage of the popular vote that went to Kerry in the last election, or the relative numbers of registered Democrats and Republicans, could be encyclopedic. Two separate lists that do nothing but provide a single binary digit of information that is simply a bald assertion cannot be made encyclopedic and cannot be made NPOV. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:54, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC) (P. S. It doesn't say anywhere that you should "be bald!")
 * Delete. Pointless and hopelessly POV. 23skidoo 20:14, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, as above Cdc 20:20, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Move it to category "dynamic changed lists". In order for the poll to be legitimate, after 7 days voters' participation should exceed 2% of the active voters population. The decision method that should be used in order to decide what to do should be the majority rule method. Whatever the poll's decision is, it should be valid for 3 years then reconsider.Iasson 20:57, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Say what? -- Jmabel | Talk 01:50, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, crap. Neutralitytalk 20:58, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm no listophobe, but this is too much. There is no one measure of terms like "liberal" or "conservative," and no way of really determining what city belongs on this list or List of conservative cities (also on VfD). I've talked to people who consider Berkeley a conservative city because it tends to be "business friendly" in many ways. This is about as unquantifiable and pointless as, say, a list of beautiful women. Szyslak 22:24, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete -- DCEdwards1966 22:25, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * DeletePhilip 22:34, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nonsense.  RickK 00:41, Jan 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV list. Gazpacho 00:53, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV pap. Edeans 09:17, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, another useless list. Megan1967 00:37, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Jmabel | Talk 01:50, Jan 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lacrimosus 08:19, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Useless and POV. Carrp 16:44, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as it is now, since it is lame. But if quantified, it could be interesting. It would need more cities, voting records over time, percent of citizens registered to the Liberal Party, etc. Cayzle 11:53, 10 Jan 2005 (EST)
 * Delete. Useless, un-maintainable, un-verifiable, POV list. Jayjg |  (Talk)  19:29, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV list that is sure to attract a lot of arguments. --Deathphoenix 16:55, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is some merit to looking at how the large majority of people in a city vote. Putting San Francisco on the list seems rational since it overwhelmingly votes for liberal candidates. I think the list deserves to live. 129.177.61.124 10:30, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * delete totaly a pov article. --Boothy443 10:32, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too POV, not helpful. Moncrief 08:28, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)