Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swedish Budget
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was No consensus. But may I suggest this is relisted or Transwiki'd anyway? Redwolf24 (talk—How's my driving?) 23:07, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Swedish Budget[edit]
The Swedish federal budget for 2004-2006. WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. DS 14:19, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, encyclopedic. Kappa 14:31, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, Swedish cruft, I mean federal cruft. I agree with DragonflySixtyseven that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. While this is useful to some people, it is not appropriate for a general-purpose encyclopedia. At the most, merge significant figures into Sweden. — JIP | Talk 14:37, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge, merge this page with Economy of Sweden under a (the) budget section. -weatherguy1033
- Certainly not worth keeping as its own entry. Merge per weatherguy1033. Dottore So 19:29, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm split between merging and deleting this. No way does a federal budget deserve its own entry. That said, I can't decide if this would be a useful (in which case merge) or detrimental (in which case Delete) addition to any keepworthy article. The Literate Engineer 23:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikisource then delete. Sjakkalle, thanks for proposing a good solution. The Literate Engineer 16:19, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I think national budgets might belong in Wikisource. The raw numbers are not truly encyclopedic material, but the info might be useful. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikisource per Sjakkalle. Xoloz 09:06, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikisource as per Sjakkalle. I would welcome a more descriptive article a la Canadian federal budget, 2005. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-10-5 T 01:56:19 Z
- 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.