Talk:TJ Cox/Archive 1

Archive 1

Notability of the CA-21 race

@Westroopnerd:: as you've discovered, creating a wiki page for a candidate who hasn't won yet is very controversial. We've been having a discussion about this all over the place (see my "Keep" statement on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hiral Tipirneni (2nd nomination)). I think that regardless of whether or not Cox wins or loses, this race has become notable:

• Rakich, Nathaniel (2018-11-21). "We're Tracking The Unresolved Midterm Races". FiveThirtyEight. Retrieved 2018-11-22.
  • "Nate Silver on Twitter". Twitter. Retrieved 2018-11-22. The @AP and most of the networks still have this race called for Valadao, which is just super lazy (and that's about the nicest thing I can say about it). Should have been uncalled 10 days ago.
  • "What Went Down In The 2018 Midterms". FiveThirtyEight. 2018-11-06. Retrieved 2018-11-22. Chances of winning in every race [..]CA-21: D: 66%, R: 34%
• Itkowitz, Colby. "Analysis | These races are still undecided more than two weeks after Election Day". Washington Post. Retrieved 2018-11-22.

As I've been saying elsewhere, I think regardless of whether the candidate is notable, the race certainly is at this point. I don't have energy to create California's 21st congressional district election, 2018, but I'd be happy to help create it, and I would defend its creation (as I've done on California's 10th congressional district election, 2018 and California's 39th congressional district election, 2018). Would you have the time and energy to create an article for California's 21st congressional district election, 2018? -- RobLa (talk) 20:09, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@RobLa: I would actually have to disagree. CA races stretching late into the game like CA-21 has so far is quite common (the same happened in virtually every other CA House race) and I wouldn't say it automatically confers notability. My reasoning behind creating an article for Cox was that he was likely to be a member-elect of Congress, and I maintain that all signs point to that being the case. Either way, I don't have a huge problem with reverting back to the created article if and when Cox pulls it out. Westroopnerd (talk) 08:24, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Westroopnerd: Hmm, interesting. You're making a similar case that Enos733 makes over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/California's 10th congressional district election, 2018, but you're not yet on board with the idea that California's 21st congressional district election, 2018 would be an inherently notable article. Is that a fair statement of your position? -- RobLa (talk) 19:28, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft

As something of a compromise here, I've decided to create a draft over at Draft:TJ Cox that we could simply replace the redirect with if Cox were to win. With that in mind, the draft is written in a manner suggesting Cox has already won. It's clearly to soon to say that's the case yet, of course. Hopefully this satisfies y'all. Westroopnerd (talk) 09:10, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Orphaned references in TJ Cox

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of TJ Cox's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "General Election":

• From Bill Foster (politician): "General election results". Chicago Tribune. 2008-03-08.
• From 2018 United States House of Representatives elections in California: "2018 California general election results" (PDF). Retrieved 10 June 2019.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:32, 2 August 2019 (UTC)