Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Initiative 957

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The result was Keep, nomination withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin closure. — Dbromage [Talk] 04:26, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Initiative_957

Initiative_957 (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

According to the Washington State Secretary of State's election website, I-957 has been withdrawn by the sponsor. Also, WA-DOMA's website appears to have been closed down. If the initiative is dead and will not be on the ballot, I believe this article is no longer relevant. TechBear 01:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• I had to look for the list of initiatives proposed on the 2007 ballot, which I found at the Secretary of State's web site. Sure enough, 957 was withdrawn by the sponsor. Some of the others are interesting as well, like Initiative 971, which would mandate surgically implanting a GPS chip into the body of any violent criminal. Since Initiative 957 was withdrawn by the sponsor, and since anyone can apparently submit a ballot initiative whether it makes it onto the ballot or not, I vote to delete this article. Also, the initiative sponsors should be told not to disrupt state government in order to prove a point. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 02:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Neutral and Comment. Notability is not temporary. Even if a proposal such as this does not proceed, if it received substantial news coverage then it is notable. Dbromage [Talk] 06:03, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
• Dbromage makes a good point that notability is not temporary. When I-957 was filed, it received worldwide attention; I think that merits inclusion and would like to withdraw my nomination for deletion. TechBear 16:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KrakatoaKatie 07:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 10:34, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 10:34, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and recast (and pruned down) as a historical article relating to the gay marriage controversy. Notability is not temporary per Dbromage. This was done in response to the right wing claim that marriage exists solely for the purpose of procreation. Point made. Also, for Elkman, Government is not Wikipedia. (Been wanting to say that). Democratic governments exist in order to, among other things, pay attention to points made by concerned citizens (Bill of Rights). Note that the AfD nomination has been withdrawn which should result in a speedy close. — Becksguy 20:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
• Keep and update! I always wondered where to go for the "Notability is not temporary" issue, thanks, quite pleased to know it. Article does need updating and pruning. ZueJay (talk) 00:33, 29 August 2007 (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.