Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minister of State for Competitiveness


 * 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. The deletion nomination is open-ended, somewhat ambiguous, and parts of it are not based upon English Wikipedia's Deletion policy. Some parts are essentially guideline based, (e.g. WP:NOTRIVIA, and potential innacuracy issues per WP:NOR), but no further qualification is provided in the deletion nomination to justify these claims. Relative to this, per the discussion herein, consensus is for the article to be retained North America1000 09:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Minister of State for Competitiveness

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced, inaccurate, trivial and unnecessary. Alex 04:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Alex 04:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America1000 04:36, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment. I’ve added content and sources. It may still be trivial, but hopefully no longer inaccurate. Mccapra (talk) 08:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. Can't see what the problem is with an article about a ministerial office. We have plenty of these. They are clearly encyclopaedic. No good reason given for deletion other than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. As a ministerial office, it is clearly encyclopedic. It is similar to Minister for Social Exclusion and Minister for Portsmouth as they we're short-lived ministerial offices with them only having a few ministers under one government. PoliceSheep99 (talk) 16:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep No real basis for nomination. Mccapra (talk) 03:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Having seen the arguments here, I've expanded the article and added sources. Alex 07:24, 16 May 2020 (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.