Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brazilian general election, 2018

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. WP:SNOW NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:50, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian general election, 2018[edit]

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

This article is predicting the future (WP:CRYSTAL). The article in portuguese has been deleted for this reason. Holy Goo (talk) 14:06, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Nominator needs to familiarise themselves with WP:CRYSTAL as it specifically allows articles like this: "Individual scheduled or expected future events should be included only if the event is notable and almost certain to take place." See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States presidential election, 2020 (2nd nomination), which was similarly nominated in error a few days ago. Number 5 7 14:10, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CRYSTAL/Number 57. Lugnuts ^{Precious bodily fluids} 15:01, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per CRYSTAL and its clear statement on the matter: "Examples of appropriate topics include the 2020 U.S. presidential election..." (italics added). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:18, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. General elections in sovereign countries (including future ones) are notable and this one is confirmed to be occurring as specified in the articles title and relevant sources. Ajf773 (talk) 19:08, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 19:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I already explained in Talk:Brazilian general election, 2018. The deletion of the article at pt wikipedia was not even following the policies of pt wikipedia, so it is pointless as a justification. In fact, perhaps someone fluent in portuguese should ask the undeletion of that article at that project. --Cambalachero (talk) 22:29, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, Snow close per above. MB298 (talk) 03:45, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per all the above. AusLondonder (talk) 06:59, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep as per everyone. J 947 07:17, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per all of the above. Mélencron (talk) 20:45, 2 March 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.