Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tees Valley mayoral election, 2020


 * 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. I accept that the previous precedents set were for pages that had at least some non-boilerplate information on them. However, some of these pages already have potential candidates declaring an interest - especially London. The argument for deletion would be much stronger for pages that were not guaranteed to be eventually created. That is not the case here and the keep camp has pointed to a policy page that explicitly allows this kind of article. SpinningSpark 12:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Tees Valley mayoral election, 2020

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an article with no content and is far too far in to the future, it should be deleted now and recreated in the future. This fails policy on future articles which are nothing more than speculation, the essay Too soon, should also be read here. The article also has no reliable source media coverage and any which would be generated at this stage would be nothing more than WP:ROUTINE, because the election is simply far to far in the future.

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are virtually identical in nature to the main article being nominated, and would if listed separately have identical reasoning for deletion:

Sport and politics (talk) 19:00, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:23, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  02:52, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep No problem with articles on the next election. We've already had an AfD on these articles (Articles for deletion/West Midlands mayoral election, 2020) which resulted in a keep decision. Number   5  7  12:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep A consensus has already been reached here: Articles_for_deletion/West_Midlands_mayoral_election,_2020 CarlDurose (talk) 13:40, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The articles as they currently stand have no content at all, this needs to be rectified, as simply having empty articles is pointless, and of no benefit. This is way too soon, for these articles, and nothing more than speculation, and content free. Waiting 2 years for content is absurd as reason to have an empty mood. Sport and politics (talk) 14:57, 4 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Unless some actual content can be added to the article.  Del ♉ sion 23  (talk)  20:40, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I would propose that the articles in question require expanding, rather than deleting. CarlDurose (talk) 08:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It seems to be standard practice to have articles for next elections; hence, all of the pages that fall under Category:Future elections in Europe. Admittedly, those further in the future may start as fairly empty stub pages, but they get built up over time. Deleting them now will just result in their recreation fairly soon. WP:CRYSTALBALL specifically mentions future elections as being appropriately notable. Please also see examples of past relevant AfDs here:
 * Articles for deletion/French presidential election, 2022 (2017 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Brazilian general election, 2018 (2017 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/London Assembly election, 2020 (2017 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Next Irish general election (2016 keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Polish parliamentary election, 2019 (2016 - speedy keep)
 * Articles for deletion/United States presidential election, 2020 (2015 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Makati local elections, 2016 (2015 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Caloocan local elections, 2016 (2015 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Chempaka by-election, 2015 (2015 - speedy keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Next Serbian parliamentary election (2014 - withdrawn)
 * Articles for deletion/Argentine general election, 2015 (2013 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Singaporean general election, 2016 (2013 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Philippine House of Representatives elections in Central Visayas, 2013 (2012 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Hesse state election, 2013 (2012 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/European Parliament Election, 2014 (United Kingdom) (2012 - keep) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlDurose (talk • contribs) 09:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Articles for deletion/Next Barbadian general election (2012 - speedy keep)
 * Articles for deletion/United States presidential election, 2012 (3rd nomination) (2009 - speedy keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Crawley Council election, 2012 (2011 - not delete)
 * Articles for deletion/Minnesota gubernatorial election, 2010 (2008 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Next Danish parliamentary election (2007 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/Georgia gubernatorial election, 2006 (2005 - keep)
 * Articles for deletion/UK general election, 2005 (2004)

None of the articles being proposed for deletion are national elections, and all of the articles which are non-national elections which were proposed for deletion were far closer to the actual event occurring, and had content on the pages. These pages are empty pages and nearly three years away, this is way too soon, as there is no information to go on the pages, other than wild speculation. Sport and politics (talk) 11:45, 5 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep * Sigh * We had a consensus on this a month ago. There is no new arguments here. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 15:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There are no actual arguments to keep empty articles hanging around for years, put forward here, the previous consensus' was we have had the previous elections now. That is hardly a compelling reason based on sound policy to keep articles with no information hanging around. Quoting WP:Crystal directly here "are not appropriate article topics if nothing can be said about them that is verifiable". These articles clearly fall in that clause. There s nothing which can be said about the articles, beyond they are happening in 2020. Sport and politics (talk) 15:08, 5 June 2017 (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.