Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/London Assembly election, 2020


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 22:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

London Assembly election, 2020

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:CRYSTAL. The elections are not for another four years and as such there is no information for it presently. It may be better re-establishing the article closer to the date. Also nominating:
 * Nördic  Nightfury  15:37, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  Nördic   Nightfury  15:38, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  Nördic   Nightfury  15:38, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

We have pages for the upcoming election in the United States, Scotland, Wales which all are not until 2020 and we do have some information as to who might run46.33.136.216 (talk) 13:24, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom.--TM 01:05, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Firstly, the nominator has failed to notify the two good faith creators of these articles - myself and . WP:CRYSTALBALL states that "examples of appropriate topics include the United States presidential election, 2020". See the following previous AFDs:
 * Articles for deletion/Next Irish general election (2016, Keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Next Serbian parliamentary election (2014, Withdrawn)
 * Articles for deletion/Next Barbadian general election (2012, Speedy Keep)
 * AusLondonder (talk) 14:38, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

We do tend to keep nearly all next-foo-election articles, but I'm not sure that this one yet serves much purpose. It will probably gain some meaningful content by late 2018, but it doesn't matter much whether it exists for the next 18 months as a one-line stub. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)
 * Speedy keep We have articles for numerous future elections at all levels (supranational, national, regional, local). No need to single this out for special attention. Number   5  7  17:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Neutral. United States presidential election, 2020 is a poor comparator. With all due respect to the big city of Greater London and its 8-million population, its mayor is a more lowly character than the executive President of a nation of 324 million people which also happens to be the planet's only remaining superpower. As a result, London's mayoral elections attract rather less forward-planning and advance coverage than the multi-billion-dollar race to occupy a reworked version of Leinster House.
 * Keep: per WP:NOTCRYSTAL, which clearly states that: "individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. Dates are not definite until the event actually takes place. If preparation for the event is not already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include the 2020 U.S. presidential election". In the case of the articles being proposed for deleition the dates of these elections are established in law, are the 'next' election in both cases (its not like this is an article for an election 2060), which is a common and accepted practice across Wikipedia. Not sure the nominator really understands what this deletion procedure is for as they had to be reminded to notify the article creators (one of which is me) and even their one line rationale has factual errors as the elections are taking place in three years time not four. Ebonelm (talk) 11:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment It is not a requirement in WP:AFD to notify article creators. Bondegezou (talk) 12:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep As per User:BrownHairedGirl, it doesn't make a huge difference if these are deleted now and recreated later, or left. The Mayoral article does actually have some content, so merits being kept. The Assembly article says nothing, but it's not causing any harm existing! Bondegezou (talk) 12:23, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep' as articles for future elections can inform interested voters. Earthscent (talk) 00:38, 14 February 2017 (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.