Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States vice-presidential debate, 1976


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 00:38, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

United States vice-presidential debate, 1976

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced and partially written like an essay, most of this is just a transcript, unsure if there is a copyright violation. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:39, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:40, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:40, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:40, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:40, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Against I'm not sure why politicians would have copyrighted their comments at a public debate. Surely that falls within public domain. The debate is common knowledge and the Bob Dole comments about Democrat wars are well known and often cited. The article has been around for a decade and has been continually updated and expanded throughout that period. Surely a few newspaper articles about the debate from 1976 could be found rather than deleting it. I don't see what is to be gained for historical memory of political events if it is deleted on the basis of a spurious copyright claim.J&#39;onn J&#39;onzz (talk) 12:20, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Neutral Deletion rationale is unclear. "Unsourced" isn't a valid argument at AfD, and the rest of the rationale is... well, read it back to yourself. Exemplo347 (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep it is widely cited as the first such debate, and, certainly, both candidates were/are major figures in American political history. Article needs improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:14, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - There are certainly enough sources to meet V, NPOV, NOR, and NEVENT. NEVENT indicates need for indepth, sustained coverage, which I think is satisfied. Smmurphy(Talk) 13:33, 8 April 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.