Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States House of Representatives elections, 2012


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

United States House of Representatives elections, 2012

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

WP:CRYSTAL —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:39, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. No proper sources in the article.--Александр Мотин (talk) 09:43, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep There's no prize awarded for being the first to create an article. Not surprisingly, there's not much to say.  On the other hand, as the article points out, there will be relevant information soon, even before the first candidate declares, because reapportionment will be taking place in early 2011, and springtime state legislative sessions will revise the congressional districts.  In those cases where seats are lost, two U.S. representatives will be in the same district; where seats are gained, new districts will be created with no incumbent.  Mandsford 13:24, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep because I fail to see how this fails WP:CRYSTAL and not having proper sources is not an argument for deletion by itself. #1 on CRYSTAL states: "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place."  This is a no-brainer here, as it clearly passes this.  Further, it is ironic that CRYSTAL includes the 2012 presidential election (the next election) as an example.  Surely we can extrapolate that to allow the next House article to stay.  Finally, as Mandsford says, we'll have relevant information very shortly - as they say, the next campaign starts the day after the previous election - so what's the point in deleting this? Bds69 (talk) 13:27, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Sadly, the next election cycle has already begun. Ray  Talk 15:36, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  --  Ray  Talk 15:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Bds69, not a violation of WP:CRYSTAL. Sources are needed, but expansion of the article is a certainty.--JayJasper (talk) 17:21, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Not WP:CRYSTAL. This is a subject that is evolving right now.  Article needs to be fleshed out, but it will grow over time.  Ebikeguy (talk) 19:43, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, next election for this body and as such certainly relevant. Daniel Case (talk) 00:25, 5 November 2010 (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.