Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Politics of Northwest Territories
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-18 08:38Z
[edit] Politics of Northwest Territories
Stub since August. No one has even made the slightest effort to improve this article. Can be re-created when there's some real content, more than a sentence. Delete GreenJoe 15:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect to Northwest Territories for now. 23skidoo 15:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Notable topic. Being a stub is not a valid reason for deletion. Resolute 18:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Resolute pretty much said it all. Agent 86 19:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Redirect per 23skidoo Soltak | Talk 20:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- I don't quite understand what the article is supposed to be about. The NWT certainly has a unique political structure but right now the article just lists political issues very generally. --JGGardiner 21:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - that's why I'm suggesting a redirect. At the moment the article offers nothing that isn't already covered in the main article. 23skidoo 21:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- I have expanded the article. It still isn't great, but it shows that the topic is capable of expansion into a proper article. Agent 86 23:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the expansion Agent 86. It's nice to see that even a Canadian nationalist can make valuable contributions at times. =) Yes, I'd definitely keep the article as it is now. This morning it was a little different, with only one vague sentence. A bit like looking at a hanfull of seeds, not knowing what you'd get if you planted them. Though it is a funny thing because we don't seem to have these articles for other jurisdictions. Should there be a Politics of Alberta or Politics of Toronto article as well? --JGGardiner 05:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Dude, there is a Politics of Alberta and a Politics of Toronto article. Kevlar67 19:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the expansion Agent 86. It's nice to see that even a Canadian nationalist can make valuable contributions at times. =) Yes, I'd definitely keep the article as it is now. This morning it was a little different, with only one vague sentence. A bit like looking at a hanfull of seeds, not knowing what you'd get if you planted them. Though it is a funny thing because we don't seem to have these articles for other jurisdictions. Should there be a Politics of Alberta or Politics of Toronto article as well? --JGGardiner 05:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep as reasonable stub (now expanded.) Spacepotato 23:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep - as it has now been expanded, the rationale for deletion is no longer applicable (although it was questionable from the beginning--being a stub is no reason to delete). -- Black Falcon 01:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep expanded version; clearly notable. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 03:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and keep expanding where possible. The "real content" required in the nomination is well and truly there. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 04:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep no deletion rationelle. --Qyd 05:05, 14 February 2007 (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.
