This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
That article was recently closed as no consensus, but the closing admin suggested starting a merge discussion, as the person only barely meets WP:GNG and fails WP:POLITICIAN. So, I'm proposing said merge pbp 15:36, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By "merge" do you mean linking the page? If so, I agree with Purpleback's assessment. --Socalpolitik (talk) 20:21, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – This article (California State Assembly elections, 2012) is entirely in table list format. Merging the article here would have an effect of removing all of the sourced information in the Leslie Daigle article, essentially blocking the public from having access to the information. Northamerica1000(talk) 11:40, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If Northamerica1000 is correct, then yes, I oppose the merge of the article. Thanks for the clarification. --Socalpolitik (talk) 18:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as the closing admin in the AFD noted, a redirect/merge is appropriate in this case. Valenciano (talk) 08:38, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Socialpolitik and North America, also there is a lot of content that is completely irrelevant to the assembly race entry that is not even an article.LuciferWildCat (talk) 05:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Also, the topic "Leslie Daigle" is presently passing both WP:BASICandWP:GNG, in which this person has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Many of the sources address the subject directly in detail, so no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material. Due to this, the article is worthy of being a stand-alone article. Merging to this list/table style article would just make the information about the topic unaccessible to the public.