Talk:Division of Wright

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Australia: Queensland / Politics Low‑importance

	Australia portal Division of Wright is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Proposed deletion

Hi, im the person who startedv up this article. Recently i got mail from another wiki user, saying that this article is proposed for deletion. The reason for that being that the electorate does not exist and that wikipedia is not a crystal ball.

I had a look at the wiki guidelines and it states that all articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred.

I really do believe the article meets this critera. 1. Everything in is it verifiable with creditable sources. 2. If the electorate was officially made, a wiki article on it would certainly have been published. This meets teh critera of the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred 3. The people who live in the proposed electorate and many political pundits would have have an interest in the proposed electorate 4. And finally, the electorate is offically and formally proposed by the AEC. Its not like the electorate is based on rumor or speculation

I really hope and believe that many fellow wiki users will agree. Several wiki users have also added more information onto the article, which i thank you for. I hope you'll support this page continue its existence. Cheers,

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Supun47 (talk • contribs) 09:59, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the creation of the article was premature, given that the redistribution has not yet been finalised. But now that it's here it might as well stay, given the overwhelmingly likelihood that the article, if deleted, would need to be recreated at some future point. Digestible (talk) 10:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Theres many wiki articles based on FORMAL, OFFICIAL proposals. A good example are the numerous pages on proposed buildings and highways- Proposed tall buildings and structures. Anotehr example closer to home- Proposed railways in Sydney --Supun47 (talk) 10:34, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one who proposed it for deletion. Here's why:

Verifiability does not confer notability. The Liberal candidate for, say, Grayndler is perfectly verifiable but not in the least notable.
If the electorate is officially made, of course it would need a wiki article. But at this stage, it could well have to be deleted in the long run (if it's not created it won't be notable), and we generally don't have articles on things like that. WP:CRYSTAL states that scheduled or future events should only be included if the event is almost certain to take place. This one's not; Flynn/Wright last time proves that. I really can't see any problem with including all the information on the proposed Wright in the Next Australian federal election page until it's confirmed.
It's not our responsibility to provide people with information relevant specifically to them. I'm interested in my local councillors, but they're not notable - that's not what Wikipedia is about.
As I said, a Division of Wright was officially and formally proposed by the AEC last time too, and it didn't happen. I don't dispute that this time it's far more likely to happen, but I just suggest that it's speculation to have it this early. There's absolutely no harm in waiting. Frickeg (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is absolutley no harm in keeping this page. 1. Where does it say notability in the criteria? It says verifiability, nothing about notability. 2. The electorate of Flynn was evntually created. Yes it wasnt of the name wright but in then end it was created 3. There are pople out tehre who are interetsed in this stuff. You may not be inetertsed in your local councillors, others may. You may not be interested PROPOSED BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES but otehrs may. You may not be interested in PROPOSED RAILWAYS IN SYDNEY but others. Again i use those examples to prove to you that wiki does accept artciles on formal, official propsoed events. Will the buildings in that article be craeted ever? It could but let me tell you theres much more of a chance of this electorate being created then many of thsoe buildings. Will those railwyas be acyually made? maybe, but im sure theres more of a chnace of this electorate.

Look, theres many otehr examples. There are many, many more people out there who would want and have an interest in this article then people like you who wants the page deleted. You say theres no harm in waiting. well, theres no harm in keeping it. and as i have showed, this article deserves to stay.--Supun47 (talk) 08:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Judith Wright.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:22, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]