Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unitary and federal systems of government


 * 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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 06:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Unitary and federal systems of government

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This article is unreferenced original research on a topic that is better handled by the seperate articles on unitary states and federations (and confederations for that matter). There is nothing sourced to merge to either article and it is an unlikely search string on its own. Eluchil404 22:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and fix. See, THIS is why we need to get rid of articles about Stunky the Pokemon Card (June 26 AfD debate)!  Everyone wants to defend idiotic pieces about Smallville episodes and Go-Bots and Dragonball Z cards; but when someone tries to write an intelligent article about governmental systems, you get a nomination for deletion because it's imperfect.  I agree that there should be citations to authority, and that it should link to the articles cited by E-1404.  It's a good supplement to both articles, since it attempts to make comparisons and contrasts (I agree, we need more than original research).  It's one of those things like comparing parliamentary governments to American-style republics.  Add some cites, keep this in.  Mandsford 01:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It's been a while since I've seen an example of a literal argumentum ad Pokemon. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 02:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Material already covered in the respective articles for each system. The comparison is a paper topic rather than an encyclopedia article, even if it were not complete original research. ObiterDicta ( pleadings • errata • appeals ) 02:56, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, material is already well covered in separate articles and is best covered that way rather than this POV-risky comparison. --Dhartung | Talk 06:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 16:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete unless referenced, Keep if referenced.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 18:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Both systems (and confederate) are explained well and dandy in their own articles.  There article is esesntially restating information from the others Corpx 06:18, 1 July 2007 (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.