Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political collapse of the United States (hypothetical)


 * 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   delete. L Faraone  00:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Political collapse of the United States (hypothetical)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Hypothetical situation. There probably are enough sources out there for this topic to meet WP:GNG but I don't believe that this is an appropriate encyclopedic subject. Funny Pika! 12:08, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep It's notable because discussed in multiple sources (Slate did a series on various forms of collapse) and while we may want to combine this with related themes (social collapse, economic collapse, etc) it's a legitimate topic. Wouldn't oppose merging if there are relevant targets. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:07, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * delete it is not any form of standard study, just random people making random guesses. wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALball. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  13:39, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:NOT. Wikipedia is not for speculation, soapboxing, prognostication, or hypothetical analysis. Ray  Talk 13:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. & WP:NOT. Non-encyclopedic subject.--JayJasper (talk) 19:21, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - too broad, vague and hypothetical to really work as a topic for a single article. Robofish (talk) 15:52, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per reasonings of TRPOD & RAY.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:33, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Speedy, as Wikipedia shouldn't be WP:CRYSTAL, prognosis center, also article is written more like an essay in totally unencyclopedic style, with authors own opinion and others' WP:POVs. I am totally against to write articles in "What would be if it would be?" style. Alex discussion ★ 11:35, 30 May 2013 (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.