Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2025 Runcorn and Helsby recall petition

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 ‎Moot. The AfD has been mooted by events and the article moved to a new title. Eluchil404 (talk) 02:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)(non-admin closure)[reply]

2025 Runcorn and Helsby recall petition (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. I redirected this to Mike_Amesbury#Assault_conviction but was reverted. This petition may happen if some conditions are fulfilled, at which time it may become notable (or perhaps only if it gets the required number of signatures), but for now it is something better treated in one or two sentences at the target article. Fram (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Politics, and England. Fram (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It is common practice to have articles for recall petitions (See here for example). He has already met the trigger point by the custodial sentence that he has received so barring any changes, this will occur. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 16:01, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  A recall petition hasn't been triggered, as Amesbury hasn't exhausted all appeals. It's also possible that Amesbury resigns before the petition occurs. CR (talk) 16:03, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • WP:CRYSTAL allows for articles that are likely, even if they are not nailed on. Amesbury only has one appeal route possible: he pleaded guilty, so he can only appeal on the severity of the sentence. It is unlikely that Amesbury's appeal of the sentence will see it sufficiently reduced so as to avoid a petition. I don't think we need to worry about that. It is more probable that Amesbury will just resign, which would obviate the need for the petition, but what we have done in past such cases is start with an election petition article and then re-name it to a by-election article, carrying over content. Bondegezou (talk) 17:07, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect at least until the petition occurs - if it occurs. WP:CRYSTAL applies CR (talk) 16:02, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I created the article and reverted Fram's redirect. The suggestion that this comes under WP:NOTNEWS is weak and seems to misunderstand WP:NOTNEWS. We have or have had articles for every prior UK Parliamentary election petition. (There have been 6 and 5 led to by-elections, in which cases the election petition article evolved into a by-election article.) The claim thatThis petition may happen if some conditions are fulfilled is misleading. Amesbury has received a sentence that will lead to a petition. There are 3 events that can override that. (1) The most likely is that Amesbury can just resign, but then we just convert this article into a by-election article, carrying over the content: there is no need for deletion because of that possibility. (2) Amesbury can appeal his sentence: he pleaded guilty, so he can only appeal the sentence. It is unlikely that such an appeal would produce such a reduction in the sentence that a petition would still not be triggered. (This is discussed in the article.) (3) A general election is called. Very unlikely! We have multiple sources talking about an election petition and I promise you there will be more in the next 48 hours. You can already bet on the outcome of the by-election at Ladbrokes (Reform UK are favourites)! We have this conversation every time a petition or by-election is imminent. We usually end up keeping the article concerned. Should something unexpected happen, we can redirect then. Right now, readers will be looking for information on these events. Bondegezou (talk) 17:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Should something unexpected happen, we can redirect then." That's doing things the wrong way round, and is exactly why we have WP:NOTNEWS, WP:SUSTAINED and WP:CRYSTAL. "We have multiple sources talking about an election petition ", yes, see my previous sentence. If and when the conditions are met and a petition actually happens, then is the time to change the redirect into an article. "We have this conversation every time a petition or by-election is imminent." Er, then perhaps it is time another approach is tested? As I haven't participated in these previous discussion IIRC, it seems that quite a few editors have the same concerns about such premature creations. Fram (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Runcorn and Helsby (UK Parliament constituency). Moondragon21 (talk) 19:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The article is well-sourced and no case has been made why NOTNEWS should apply here. Cortador (talk) 19:29, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete While this is now very likely to happen, it's not quite a foregone conclusion. As the article itself points out, all the appeal procedures have to be completed first. The appeal court could reduce his sentence to e.g. a community service order (unlikely but not impossible), or he could resign, or he could die. It's not a case of WP:NOTNEWS (if this does happen it would be news) but WP:CRYSTAL. PatGallacher (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CRYSTAL does not require that something is aforegone conclusion. We often have articles for things beingvery likely to happen. Bondegezou (talk) 11:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. He's met the bar for a Recall Petition, so the only way this doesn't happen is if he resigns before it's formally called, in which case this article is just going to be named 2025 Runcorn and Helsby by-election, so there's nothing to be gained in waiting.MoreofaGlorifiedPond,Really... (talk) 19:35, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The requirements for a recall petition have been met so WP:CRYSTAL no longer applies. Assuming the petition succeeds, this will be renamed 2025 Runcorn and Helsby by-election. As we have allowed articles for recall petitions to have a stand alone page, and as the sources meet GNG, the page should be kept. --Enos733 (talk) 22:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No censorship of Labour misdeeds, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 240F:CA:2CE5:1:A974:DD4F:454C:265D (talk) 22:59, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep MP being convicted and jailed is news, Recall petitions are established events in the UK now, and by-elections are long established as notable with local and national coverage (I'd argue separate articles for UK by-elections have 'grandfather rights' here). doktorb _words^deeds 04:23, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge WP:TOOSOON the existence of this article is misleading as by appearing in search results it gives the impression there is a petition in existence, when there isn't. It doesn't meet any of the exceptions of in WP:CRYSTAL as while we can be almost certain there will be forthcoming Olympics or presidential elections, it is still very possible there will be a different outcome. Merge to Mike_Amesbury#Assault_conviction. Orange sticker (talk) 13:15, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Reply We don't have an article on "2025 papal conclave", even though there is the serious possibility that it will happen, through the death or resignation of the current pope. We don't create by-election articles for a constituency where the MP is known to have a terminal illness. PatGallacher (talk) 01:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, we aren't going to create an article on the by-election before we know it definitely will take place, even though there probably will be one this year, either because a recall petition succeeds or the MP resigns before then. PatGallacher (talk) 15:31, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hence why when these things happen, if they're unsuccessful it remains as is. If the petition is successful, we merge it into the by-election. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:16, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

      I have to say @PatGallacher that you seem out of step on this. Yes, correct, the conclave article doesn't exist yet, but whilst Mike Amesbury is in prison, the current Pope isn't yet dead. doktorb _words^deeds 18:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't personally see a problem with a Next papal conclave article. We have Next United Kingdom general election, Next Ukrainian presidential election, Next South Korean presidential election, Next German federal election (but currently with an AfD), Next Libyan presidential election, Next New Zealand general election, Next Malian parliamentary election, Next Sudanese general election, Next North Korean parliamentary election, Next Palestinian presidential election &c. and some of those seem less likely than the next papal conclave or the Runcorn & Helsby recall petition! Bondegezou (talk) 13:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note Just to update commentors, he has appealed and the sentence has been suspended. However, as the source says, it still means a recall petition is scheduled so it could mean this AFD is now moot. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 12:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to this Sky piece, he has the opportunity to appeal his new sentence, so the possibility remains that, if he does that and his sentence is further reduced, the petition would then not be triggered. But that is an ever less likely outcome. Bondegezou (talk) 13:13, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge until we know whether a recall petition will occur I think a merger with the constituency's article should occur until we are sure that a recall petition will take place. If it is confirmed, this article can return. RyanPLB (talk) 12:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment This new BBC article from today says, "Mike Amesbury was given an immediate custodial sentence on 24 February, and although three days later this was reduced on appeal to a suspended sentence, a recall petition will now still happen." Bondegezou (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: the article now has 22 citations (7 about earlier, background events), twice as many as when the AfD started. Compared to when the AfD started, Amesbury's appeal has been heard and his new sentence still triggers the petition. (While it is technically possible that he can re-appeal, there are no reports that this is happening.) We have articles like the above now using very firm language ("will now still happen" in the above BBC article; or "The suspended sentence still means the process of a recall petition will be triggered in the Runcorn and Helsby constituency" in this Liverpool Echo piece). I think that satisfies any WP:CRYSTAL concerns. The WP:NOTNEWS concerns were never well explained, but the citations and precedence answers those, and likewise for WP:SUSTAINED. Bondegezou (talk) 11:44, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This piece yesterday says, "This means he will still face a process called a recall petition, which starts the process of removing a Member of Parliament." (It later says, "The recall petition may be cancelled out if Amesbury decides to resign as a Member of Parliament", but, as discussed above, in that case we convert the current article into a by-election article.) Bondegezou (talk) 15:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, merge or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – article has been renamed to 2025 Runcorn and Helsby by-election now that Amesbury is officially standing down, so a by-election will be taking place DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 18:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I quote the most recent link: "In an update on its website, Halton Borough Council, which will organise and run the recall petition in the case of the Runcorn and Helsby seat, said: "A recall petition only opens when the Speaker of the House of Commons notifies a petition officer. This would not be expected until after the appeal period, and when any appeals have been heard.

"Should a recall petition be triggered further information will be shared via the council through its usual channels, including local media outlets." The ECHO understands that the Speaker is yet to notify a petition officer at the council so this process has not officially got underway yet." PatGallacher (talk) 17:07, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Published today: "Now that Amesbury has exhausted the appeals processes and has ended up with a custodial sentence - albeit a suspended one - a process known as a recall petition will begin. This means that if 10% of registered voters in his constituency sign a form asking for him to be removed from office, he will be - and a by-election will be held. As things stand, this process has not officially started yet. If Amesbury decides to cut this process off by resigning then a by-election will be scheduled, with no need for the petition." Bondegezou (talk) 10:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that the Speaker has not yet informed the local authority that a petition should take place. PatGallacher (talk) 14:41, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Perfcetly reasonable for this article to exist. As others have pointed out Amesbury has now exhausted all his legal options for an appeal. As long as the article stresses ion the opening that this is an expected Italic textrecall petition that is fine. Kalamikid (talk) 11:16, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  He is now standing down at the earliest opportunity so this recall petition can no longer be expected.

  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62z9ell358o 77.103.130.47 (talk) 17:26, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and Close - Amesbury is standing down; a by-election is now eminently foreseeable. schetm (talk) 17:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Seconded. Dingers5Days (talk) 18:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment According to this post[1]It means no recall petition will be needed to make the contest happen so the original title was erroneous and misleading. We could do with clear guidelines on what should happen in cases like this. Orange sticker (talk) 18:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Once this discussion is closed, you could put 2025 Runcorn and Helsby recall petition up at Redirects for Discussion if the original title concerns you. schetm (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Amesbury has now announced his intention to resign so there will be a by-election, and the article has been moved to 2025 Runcorn and Helsby by-election, so we now need to close this discussion. This is Paul (talk) 19:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Close and, at least temporarily, keep as a redirect to the by election following Amesbury's announcement of his intent to resign. Once the by-election is official, I intend to put the redirect up at RfD since no such recall petition will actually occur. CR (how's my driving? call 0865 88318) 19:26, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So, a perfect indication of why this article should not have been made and was indeed a WP:CRYSTAL violation... A redirect to the article of the MP, where this could have been treated until something definitive happened (as is now the case), was always the better solution, but was not to be for some reason. Fram (talk) 19:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Who could've possibly forseen that Amesbury resigns before the petition occurs. I for one am shocked. CR (how's my driving? call 0865 88318) 20:07, 10 March 2025 (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.