Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canada and the 2008 United States presidential election

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:27, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Canada and the 2008 United States presidential election

Canada and the 2008 United States presidential election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

A subject such as this is

• Keep or merge parts that are not covered in main campaign article(s).--
  talk) 20:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Merge. This has no independent notability, but the information in here is very informative. I suggest trimming and merging. I'm almost not sure if a redirect would be necessary here, as searching for this is just very doubtful to me, but I can't come up with a good reason not to redirect if you merge.
  DARTH PANDA^duel 21:02, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Merge with either the main article on this topic or perhaps just merge the NAFTA section in the
  NAFTA article. Except for the fact we had our federal election during the height of the American campaign, there really wasn't a whole lot of action with regards to the election up here, beyond the NAFTA part. I agree I just don't see a viable independent article on this topic. 23skidoo (talk) 21:18, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Merge - per Darth Panda
  ^WS _(contribs) 22:51, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Strong Keep - This is an important article because it is intended to show how an American Presidential election has a direct effect on Canada. I think that any article on international relations, especially between two countries of such notability, make this article worth keeping. If we were to delete this article, then we should delete every article relating to American-Canadian relations. We sure would have our work cut out for us, if that were the case. Whether Amerians may like it or not, the American Presidential election does have an effect on Canada and other countries. NorthernThunder (talk) 00:06, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per Darth and 23skidoo. [ roux ] [x] 01:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:00, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Take a look at Canada and the United States presidential elections - this is obviously part of a series of interesting articles on the relationship between Canada and each American presidential election. For example, Canada and the 1960 United States presidential election is interesting and informative. Even if some articles in the series are more brief, and even if some years offered less in this area than others, they should all be kept and allowed to grow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.224.123.145 (talk) 05:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Honestly, I'm not sure if those articles have enough content to be independent either. The series has a lot of holes; it lists articles for ever election since 1960, but only the 1960, 2000, 2004, and 2008 articles exist. The 1960 article in particular doesn't cite any sources. The entire series may need to be deleted or merged with corresponding campaign/election articles. --Amwestover (talk|contrib) 06:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Amwestover - the whole series is as thin as can be and should be merged, perhaps Can+AmPresElec can form one single decent article if all are merged. At least the {{

fact}} tags would all be in one place. Franamax (talk) 09:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply

]

• Keep Encyclopaedic and merits its own article. Touches multiple topics in a way that makes merging impossible. Who'd have thought Canada was such a notable country it needs more than one article to cover its history?! WilyD 15:43, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep while I don't necessarily find this one interesting, it appears to have sources and can have wide-range impact. I'm willing to let this one sit and see how it grows. The TOPIC is notable, the article content might need some work. That will likely come from collaboration.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This AfD has been raised at the CWNB by User:NorthernThunder. Franamax (talk) 09:46, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Amw or merge per skidoo. One opinion poll and one unrelated mis-speak by a government staffer do not an article make. Spoken as a true Canadian! Franamax (talk) 09:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment That's why you are encouraged to be bold. NorthernThunder (talk) 11:41, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - Article is of questionable notability to start. To end, even assuming it was notable, this article does not pass merit: it's simply about one opinion poll and the roll of NAFTA, all of which would do better under an "international influence/reaction" section on the main article. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:28, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This series is relevent and informative, and has a lot of potential. Paxuniv (talk) 02:34, 10 November 2008 (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.