Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Call a General 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 delete‎. There's a clear consensus to Delete this article. If someone wants to work on it in Draft space and submit it to WP:AFC, contact me or WP:REFUND Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Call a General Election

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is a really recent (literally ongoing as I write this) event (if you can call it that) and I think it falls under WP:NOTNEWS, and realistically WP:NEVENT. A general election actually being called due to this is also vanishingly unlikely. In the event that happened, yeah, it would be notable, but as it stands, not really. Archimedes157 (talk) 22:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The petition has attracted sweeping media coverage, and is statistically one of the highest petitions in the website's history. I think it has significance and shows some form of public opinion towards the government. Icaldonta (talk) 23:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: NOTNEWS, this is more suited for a Wikinews article. If this leads to an election, fine, but as of now it's just a news story. Literally dropped less than a week ago, may not even be a thing in six months. Way TOOSOON. Oaktree b (talk) 01:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:EVENTCRIT.4meter4 (talk) 01:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Internet, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly just news unlikely to have lasting significance. At most there can be a couple sentences at Next United Kingdom general election. Reywas92^Talk 04:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it has a row in the table at UK Parliament petitions website#Petitions with more than 500,000 signatures which is sufficient - only one other petition in that table has its own article (Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU petition) at present this falls under WP:TOOSOON and WP:NOTNEWS. Not sure a redirect is appropriate with the current wording. Orange sticker (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If more petitions had their own article, it would make sense to keep this page. The petition simply isn’t notable enough. Agree with above comments. DWMemories (talk) 10:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:NOTNEWS: "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion." Unless the government resigns after six months and calls and election, this is of no lasting significance. AusLondonder (talk) 12:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify I wrote this article because it has gained significant media attention. After reading more about the policies, I see how this is currently not notable enough to warrant an article. However, I suggest it could be moved to draft space for the time being instead of outright deleted since it will be debated on by parliament and could have lasting and more notable impacts. AnotherWeatherEditor (talk) 14:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Recentism, can't see it passing WP:10Y. — Czello ^(music) 18:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per WP:RECENTISM and WP:NOTNEWS, will not have enduring notability JamesVilla44 (talk) 18:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An online petition that's been hijacked by far-right troll Elon Musk and his army of bots isn't encyclopedic. Obi2canibe (talk) 18:44, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Baseless claim. Troulson (talk) 19:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Evidence of the power of media campaigns to get people to do something that takes a few seconds,costs nothing, and lets them claim some credit among those kudos among others who don't understand how democracy works. Will have no "lasting and more notable impacts" except, perhaps, the removal of the petitions site. Kevin McE (talk) 20:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete petitions have been held on that site, garnered more signatures, and not lead to action. These petitions had coverage but no articles. Rankersbo (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for all the reasons given above, and tidy. Bduke (talk) 21:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:TOOSOON. It can be remade if anything comes of it (which it won't.) CR (talk) 23:33, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As above. Self generated petition making the newspapers is surely the definition of WP: NOTNEWS doktorb _words^deeds 03:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify. At this point I would consider sending this article to draft space for the time being until there is a government response and debate in parliament. This article (if you ask me) clearly meets WP:GNG as there has been substantial amount of coverage of this petition amongst various WP:RSes, so I don't see why it needs to be flat-out deleted. 92.9.145.166 (talk) 19:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We are not a soapbox at Hyde Park corner. We are not a social media site. We are not a newspaper. We are not a place for one’s personal opinions. Bearian (talk) 06:24, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:TOOSOON. Encoded Talk 💬 14:45, 1 December 2024 (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.