Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethiopian general election, 2010
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 in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was keep. NW (Talk) 19:01, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ethiopian general election, 2010[edit]
- Ethiopian general election, 2010 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
fails WP:CRYSTAL. Yes, it will almost certainly happen, but there isn't yet the information to justify an article Ironholds (talk) 13:45, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep No different than United Kingdom local elections, 2010. It's scheduled to happen, it'll be even more notable if it doesn't. Lugnuts (talk) 16:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep since there is a sourced date for it. Smile a While (talk) 19:11, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The usual practice is that the next scheduled election is a legitimate topic, whereas articles like "2016 U.S. Presidential Election" are too speculative to be of any value beyond a placeholder. As such, I see no problem in making a format that can be followed as one gets closer to the June 12, 2010 election-- which is going to be sooner than November 2, 2010 voting. Mandsford (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to and mention prominently on Elections in Ethiopia, until we have something to say on the matter. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 01:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It appears the source that was cited only mentioned 12 June 2009, to do with challenges in the Iran presidential election, 2009, and makes no mention of 12 June 2010. For what it's worth, if it works on a pentennial system, the election would be in May. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 01:26, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect etc., same as above. So far I don't think it includes enough information to warrant its own article. Spongefrog, (I am a flesh-eating robot) 09:18, 23 August 2009 (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.