Talk:United States presidential election in Massachusetts, 2008

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Merger proposal

Proposal: Merging Massachusetts Democratic primary, 2008 and Massachusetts Republican primary, 2008 be merged into this article.

Process: Please ask other editors to add their opinions. Consensus with more than 5 opinions are necessary within 14 days (by March 10, 2008) to make the merger. Otherwise, no change will happen.

Rationale: I believe the primary articles were created in all states and so the Massachusetts ones were made for the sake of consistency across the nation. That is a good goal, I suppose. However, the primaries were not particularly notable in Massachusetts compared to, for example, New Hampshire, Iowa, South Carolina, Texas, Ohio, etc. The "Superdelegate dilemma" which I added to the target article is one notable highlight in the commonwealth. However, that is more about the aftermath of and subsequent to the primary election itself. In short, this (the target article) will look very nice and complete with the primary articles included therein.—Markles 16:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Opinions:

  • The two articles listed are the exact same article right down to the link. Was the second one intended to be something different? (Tjliles2007 (talk) 00:23, 26 February 2008 (UTC))
    • My mistake. I've corrected that now.—Markles 00:31, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
      • Ok, now I got it :p I think all states should be combined like that, just makes sense. (Tjliles2007 (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2008 (UTC))
  • I support this proposed merger. Randall311 (talk) 02:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support - these are small and easily combinable.--Appraiser (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Small articles, without any actvity. For the intrepid editors, additional analysis of county, municipal and congressional district variations are desirable. -- Yellowdesk (talk) 04:00, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Support These are two small articles that would be very easy to merge. STORMTRACKER 94 Go Sox! 10:40, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I think it is a very good idea to keep these articles separate. They each are parts of very different campaigns. Also, these stubs are only three weeks old. Give them some time to ripen. Kingturtle (talk) 12:30, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
    • How much "ripening" could possibly happen? I say merge them; and then if something somehow does happen to make them more involved, then split them back.—Markles 13:14, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
      • These articles are about completely different political races. Kingturtle (talk) 13:29, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
        • Not "completely" different. They're both running for the same end goal. All three articles are really just parts of a whole.—Markles 13:58, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. I don't see the harm in keeping them separate. Kingturtle (talk) 14:13, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. DON'T US - Jimmy Slade (talk) 14:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The editors of Results of the 2008 Democratic Party presidential primaries are currently working on moving material from that article into this one (see the talk page). Additionally, we plan to expand this article (and other primary/caucus articles) to include information about delegate selection and allocation in this election. See the bottom of this page to get an idea of the kind of information we're hoping to include. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 20:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose There are two reasons to keep these articles separate. 1) Simply for consistencies sake, and more importantly 2) Both Republican and Democratic primaries are notable in their own right, and each article has the potential for major expansion. Joshdboz (talk) 18:14, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Support no real significant info in either make them one Gang14 (talk) 07:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)