Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Election results in 2005

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 delete. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:05, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Election results in 2005 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Useless and redundant content forks, there is no relation between any of the events covered in these articles aside from the fact that they were all elections in the given years, already covered at articles for individual elections. We already have List of elections in 2005 etc, so there is no need. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 05:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 05:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 05:34, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating related pages

Election results in 2009 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Election results in 2004 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

- CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 05:36, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all Pointless. Number 57 08:37, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all These seem incredibly unnecessary. I can't see this article being useful for anyone. PureRED (talk) 15:59, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect all to the relevant "List of elections in..." articles, as WP:CFORKs at valid search terms. ansh666 19:07, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, since if the intention was to create lists (these articles don't identify as lists), then lists already exist, as noted by nom. If the intention was full featured articles, then the combination of unrelated election results doesn't pass WP:GNG. Creating a redirect is useless, since if anyone ever searches for "Election results in 2005" they'll expect to see results - not a list of elections. -- IsaacSt (talk) 20:31, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all, completely pointless. Mélencron (talk) 02:20, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete All - These are useless as they are covered in other articles. -- Dane ^talk 02:52, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all as per IsaacSt's excellent reasoning – Ianblair23 (talk) 09:46, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all - agree with nominator.CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 17:48, 28 March 2017 (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.