Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2006 Colorado's 7th congressional district 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 merge to 2006 United States House of Representatives elections in Colorado. Daniel (talk) 08:22, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

2006 Colorado's 7th congressional district election

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

2006 Colorado's 7th congressional district election (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

The article fails WP:GNG and WP:SPLIT. Anything notable about the race can be put into 2006 United States House of Representatives elections in Colorado. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 06:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

• Keep - It passes the GNG.[1][2][3][4][5][6] I do not object to a merge in the current state, but there's plenty of content about the race for article expansion that would make merging into the state article unwieldy. Morbidthoughts (talk) 07:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
  • @Morbidthoughts: Actually, merging it into the general Colorado article would be pretty easy. A paragraph is just enough, not an entire separate article. So again, it fails WP:SPLIT. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 22:30, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Actually, what exactly are you responding to or are you just cutting and pasting from other AfDs without reading my rationale? Morbidthoughts (talk) 23:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
      • I am responding to your argument with MY rationale. I just disagree with your argument which you repeat again and again. KingSkyLord (talk | contribs) 01:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
        • Which part of "I do not object to a merge in the current state" did you not understand before you copy and pasted starting with, "Actually"? Morbidthoughts (talk) 01:59, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:22, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

• Merge Just because it passes GNG does not mandate a separate article. Expanded rose is more than welcome in the main state article. Reywas92^Talk 18:57, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
• Merge per Reywas92. Also, WP:ROUTINE. These elections are held every two years, as required by law. And as ROUTINE says, "Run-of-the-mill events—common, everyday, ordinary items that do not stand out—are probably not notable." Of course, these elections do not happen every day, but the fact that they are held every two years without fail also points to a common, ordinary occurrence. It's why we automatically have articles on special elections, because they do NOT fall into a ROUTINE sort of standard when it comes to the regular election cycle. Love of Corey (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
• Comment - I'll have to point out for transparency's sake that this article had been bundled into an earlier AfD, which was closed as keep. Love of Corey (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
• Merge I don't believe single seat races held as part of a general election are article-worthy. Number 57 17:43, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
• Delete This has sat as a very poorly written one source article since about the time of the election. If we cannot create something more substantive in over 14 years, we should not really try. Our whole set of articles on both members of congress and elections are riddled with POV-pushing, undue focus on very small issues and really need major rewrites. This creating of seperate articles on every single election every other year just leads to too narrow focus and opens us up to be infiltrated by POV-pushing. We should stop having articles on specific elections, and instead strive for brief summaries that avoid POV-pushing on the articles on the winning candidates and on the articles on the congressional districts.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

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.