Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political positions of the United States presidential candidates, 2016


 * 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 speedy delete. Speedy deleted 22:10, 26 January 2016 by - (A10: Recently created article that duplicates an existing topic, United States presidential election, 2016) (non-admin closure)  &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  23:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Political positions of the United States presidential candidates, 2016

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Duplicates information United States third party and independent presidential candidates, 2016, Republican Party presidential candidates, 2016, Democratic Party presidential candidates, 2016. I don't see how this article can add additional information that is not in those other 3 articles. As it stands, the current article is only about third-party candidates. Natg 19 (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 01:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I could have given it the time of the day if most positions hadn't been "unknown". --Mr. Magoo and McBarker (talk) 02:25, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as a WP:CONTENTFORK of information already included at United States presidential election, 2016. Per WP:NOPAGE, it is more appropriate to delete this spinoff article and instead present the information within the context of the article for the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 03:09, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I'm not even quite sure what this is supposed to be, but I certainly don't see anything that isn't already covered or better covered in other existing articles. &mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  \\ 04:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. &mdash;  Rhododendrites  talk  \\ 04:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Nothing useful to see. Should have been speedy deleted, tbh. --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 11:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * , you can put a speedy tag on the article if you want. I'm just not sure which criteria it meets for speedy deletion. Natg 19 (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:CSD, since you said it duplicates existing article content. --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 18:36, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Added speedy tag on article. Natg 19 (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator and Notecardforfree.--Ddcm8991 (talk) 17:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete unsourced as well as inaccurate title, since the article does not include positions of either Democrat or Republican candidates. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Opposites Attract  ‖ 20:37, 26 January 2016 (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.