Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conservative Party Agreement-in-Principle

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 of the debate was transwiki. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 12:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conservative Party Agreement-in-Principle

Nothing more than then text itself as per Wikipedia:Don't include copies of primary sources should be transwikied to wikisource Jon513 12:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete or transwikied per nom. major content is primay source.--blue520 13:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki the "full text" section, but Keep the summary of each section and the page. —Cuiviénen, Sunday, 16 April 2006 @ 16:21 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Ardenn 03:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki full text, keep summary text per Cuiviénen. Samaritan 07:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

• Transwiki to Wikisource per nom. Kimchi.sg | talk 05:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
• Transwiki and keep Keep and wikify the summary; transwiki the text. It's a matter of some notability and should be kept around.Captainktainer 09:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Transwiki full text, keep summary text per Cuiviénen. Arctic Gnome 21:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Per nom. I see a lot of articles (usually definition types) that do not change after despite being marked for transwiki. I think it requires a bit more motivation, and deleting it will provide it.In1984 23:28, 29 April 2006 (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.