Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Auckland licensing trust elections, 2016

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 merge to Auckland local elections, 2016 (and the 2013 and 2010 versions- I've fixed the merge templates). Black Kite (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Auckland licensing trust elections, 2016[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Cannot see how local elections of representatives of a few Auckland liquor licencing trusts are notable. The representatives are not inherently notable and only a few are because they have been notable politicians in the past and the elections themselves received very little significant coverage. WP:NEVENT applies Ajf773 (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages because of the same reasons, they just occurred in different years:[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the information into Auckland local elections, 2016 and similar. Mattlore (talk) 19:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only source in each of these three articles is the city government's own self-published website, which is not a notability-conferring source — there's no evidence of the licensing board elections being the subject of any significant reliable source coverage or interest. And I find it remarkably unlikely that anybody would actually be looking for information about these — it's a remarkably low-interest topic at best. Bearcat (talk) 14:06, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Mattlore.-gadfium 19:24, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Licensing trust elections are a quirky historic relic in New Zealand. It's certainly not without interest, although such interest would not be widespread. As the elections are always part of the local body elections, a merge is most appropriate. Schwede 66 08:32, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Regarding merging: Licencing trust elections are held concurrently with triennial local elections. They aren't exactly "part of" the local body elections. The importance of them is significantly lower compared to those of mayors and councilors, many of them who become elected aren't even notable as part of the Wikipedia notability guidelines (and thus neither would a Licencing Trust chairperson or member). While these articles certainly aren't notable for their own articles, the question is whether the content (full results of elections) is significant enough to be included elsewhere. I don't believe so. Ajf773 (talk) 10:17, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just confirming that "held concurrently" with local elections is a better description than "part of". Schwede 66 08:30, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To establish a clear consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 13:34, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or, at a push, Merge. Trivial. Can't see how anything this minor justifies a stand-alone article(s). DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 09:55, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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.