Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Requirements for becoming a president


 * 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. No actual arguments for deletion are on the table. Whether it should be split, merged etc. can be discussed on the talk page.  Sandstein  07:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Requirements for becoming a president

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

Duplicate page of "Requirements of a president". Elm-39 (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Not a duplicate but the main article to be discussed, the other one is a redirect as I've moved the page. Articles for deletion/Requirements of a president. – Capricorn42 ( talk ) 16:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Corrected as such. However, this article ("Requirements for becoming a president") is still better explained elsewhere, on the articles for the specific presidents. Elm-39 (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * (e/c) The article surely is a copy-paste job, I just thought this could be a nice comparison when I first saw the page. Let's hear some other opinions :) – Capricorn42 ( talk ) 16:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to President. Actually interesting information. But as it stands it is just a list of information. It would be better to talk about it in the main article on the office of president, then background information on why these requirements are, well, required could be added making a much better article. (I just checked out the President article and "Requirements for becoming a president in different countries" would make a nice section.)Redddogg (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.   --  Raven1977 Talk to me My edits  21:51, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep It could use a better title, but I get the point-- it's a list of the constitutional requirements that different nations have for being the President of that nation. Encyclopedic topic, easily sourced, easy to put links to, no original synthesis or OR necessary because it's usually written out in a pretty concise form.  In the U.S., it's about 60 words from Article II, Section 1 ("No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.").  I would be surprised if this isn't already in here somewhere, but this type of arrangement helps in the comparison of the legal qualifications for office-holders in various nations.  Mandsford (talk) 02:37, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It is. See President of France.  President of the United States, Article Two of the United States Constitution, President of Germany, President of Ireland, and so forth.  Diving the subject up by country/state/territory/so forth is how sources divide the subject up, too. Uncle G (talk) 19:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep = Yeah, this is a really good idea for an article, and it can be strongly sourced and it's definitely notable! It can have details which would be overkill in the general President article.  It probably needs a better title, though, as mentioned above.  Flopsy Mopsy and Cottonmouth (talk) 03:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem is that sources generally don't split the subject this way. I have both read and accrued &hellip; erm &hellip; let us just say a fair number of sources on the subject of constitutions, and comparative constitutional law, over the years, and I don't recall any of them dividing the subject up this way.  The division is usually a vertical one, dividing up the subject by country/state/territory/so forth, rather than a horizontal one such as here, dividing the subject up by individual aspects such as eligibility requirements for an individual office taken across all countries/states/territories/so forth.  So whilst such an article would indeed be very interesting, the reason that it would be interesting, to people such as me, is that no-one has yet done this sort of side-by-side tabulation.  So it's interesting because it would be novel.  And because it's novel, with no sources to guide the presentation of the subject, the question then becomes where to stop with this novel presentation.  What gets excluded?  Provisions on number of terms?  Suffrage?  Economic and historical factors?  Informal, but nonetheless real and documented constraints such as racial prejudice?  Party machines?  Where is the line drawn around the subject?  And if the answer is to "include everything", how does that not become a total overlap with our articles on the individual presidencies (e.g. President of France), which divide the subject up vertically, as the sources do? Uncle G (talk) 19:23, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Split into the various articles for these heads of state.  I don't see the need to duplicate the information here or the need to divide it as explained by Uncle G. -- Deadly&forall;ssassin  23:59, 18 January 2009 (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.