Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proposition 71

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 keep and move to California Constitution Article XXXV. → Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 15:29, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Proposition 71

This isn't the only Proposition 71 in the world, and I'm not sure it isn't a copyvio of some sort. Hard to check on Google for me, an idiot. JHMM13 07:32, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and disambiguate if it's not a copyvio. Propositions are highly notable. FCYTravis 07:41, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Surprisingly, perhaps, I am unable to find anything remotely looking like a copyvio on Google from this article. Peyna 15:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and move to California Constitution Article XXXV or something similar; it was enacted a year ago and is now part of law, so the Proposition itself is no longer notable, the law it created might be. Peyna 14:59, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If other Proposition 71s exist in the world, disambiguate. The news media etc. generally refer to these by the proposition number even once incorporated into the law. Check if it's a copyvio, of course, and if so delete and recreate from scratch. —Matthew Brown (T:C) 16:14, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

In that case, perhaps the best thing to do is create my suggested article and have Proposition 71 redirect there until a disambig becomes appropriate. Peyna 16:58, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and disambiguate - per reasons given - disambiguate if there are other Prop 71s. Barneyboo (Talk) 19:20, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and Move per Peyna. Since it passed, it should be under it's "real" name with a redirect from Proposition 71. -- JLaTondre 23:50, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep This Proposition is important in California, is a highlight of Arnold Schwarzenegger governorship and is notable in the US stem cell debate. Also, note that people tend to keep referring to these laws by proposition name rather then legal code name. Seano1 22:09, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Articles titles ought to have "official" names; whereas a "common use" name can always redirect to the article. Peyna 22:16, 1 December 2005 (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.