Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MPs elected in the UK general election, 1885

 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. Joyous 19:05, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)

MPs elected in the UK general election, 1885
This article was given for clean-up but as it stands it isn't even an article, its just a name with two dates and the start of an incomplete list. I'm also not sure whether a list of MPs elected in the general election of 1885 is really relevant, and I don't think theres much chance of this being expanded on. -- Hedley 02:40, Feb 20 2005
 * If someone wants to start a wikiproject developing these lists and working on them for all years general elections were held in the UK, then I would vote to keep. I'm not starting such a project, and don't really want to encourage one. This article is useless, and even if it were complete, without a real effort to do a series of these it would be a meaningless experiment. Delete . -R. fiend 07:32, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep now. Hopefully it will be completed before too long. And hopefully in the future these pages will be worked on by those who intend to do it right, not someone who feels like tossing a single name onto a page haphazardly. -R. fiend 18:02, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Concur, Delete. Radiant! 09:12, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Valid, notable, encyclopedic, useful, interesting, historically verifiable content. Stop the campaign of deletion-cruft.--Centauri 12:00, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and leave for expansion. Part of a series, certainly relevant for WP. sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 12:14, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Dan100 12:54, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Just adding that, as it stands this article is completely empty bar one name. Is it worth keeping unless something is done to it? Hedley 13:31, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Plenty of effort has been put into lists for other elections, and I dare say this one will be attended to one day. Wincoote 07:25, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep. Completely useless in its current form, but could be expanded. Articles should not exist in this form. Carrp | Talk 16:14, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. James F. (talk) 17:02, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've added a few more and put it into the format of the ten other pages in the series. Mtiedemann 13:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * In this new form I am now for keeping this, it has now been turned into meaningful content as opposed to a name with nothing else as it was before. -- Hedley 17:43, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - good to see it is expanding. Warofdreams 13:10, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, though it might be better to have a page on the election results instead on simply on the successful candidates. CJCurrie 02:32, 25 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.