Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pennsylvania United States Senate election, 2010


 * 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 no consensus to delete; default to KEEP. - Philippe 23:51, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Pennsylvania United States Senate election, 2010

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

While the information on Spector appears genuine, the rest of the article is pure speculation, with the only source being the Colbert Report. Beach drifter (talk) 19:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:CRYSTAL. A whole number of things could occur between now and 2010. Recreate the article when the elections are imminent, not two years before. PeterSymonds | talk  15:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and recreate when it happens.--Berig (talk) 18:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * keep this exact thing is mentioned in WP:CRYSTAL as an example of an appropriate topic and is linked off the main page for the 2010 senate elections. article needs improvement (a few unsourced statements), but i do not feel deletion is the appropriate course of action.Grandmartin11 (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It appears to me that it consists entirely of unsourced statements. Beach drifter (talk) 23:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep As the next election for the position, this will immediately attract speculation no matter who were to be in the running, and political speculation for positions of this sort is widely reported and considered notable. Does need sourcing, almost certainly sourceable.. DGG (talk)


 * Keep (and move to United States Senate election in Pennsylvania, 2010, the slightly more awkward standard). I've added sourcing for the Specter announcement and the speculation about Matthews, which is sourced to the NYT Magazine, making it reliably sourced speculation. It's important to keep in mind as DGG notes that this is not just the next time there will be a Senate election in PA, it's the next election for this seat. The six-year cycle means that the next election may be discussed that much before it actually occurs. --Dhartung | Talk 07:02, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per above, consistent practice has been that sources are available for the next election which Dhartung has demonstrated. Davewild (talk) 20:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, the US government could collapse within the next year and a half and then this would look stupid. WillOakland (talk) 02:51, 19 April 2008 (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.