Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foreign Influence on the 2012 Presidential Election

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 delete. Even without the clear consensus to delete, this article is an OR nightmare at best, and a partisan screed at worse. — Coren ^(talk) 00:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign Influence on the 2012 Presidential Election

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While the topic may warrant a Wikipedia article this page is too much of an opinion piece, and an essay, and a synthesis. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and cleanup If the topic may warrant an article and your only concern is that it includes opinionated material and synthesis, then why didn't you just tag it as such? Remember, AfD is not for cleanup and that there is no deadline. While I understand these are both essays and not firm policy, I think they are both solid principles. Therefore, though the article is an absolute mess, this has the potential to be a readable article, so I would !vote to keep and cleanup. Go Phightins! 20:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Never mind. This article is worse than I thought. I would almost lean toward tagging this for speedy deletion as a blatant hoax. Go Phightins! 21:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I saw this unsourced opinion piece earlier on and watchlisted it, not really knowing what to do with it. No sources, and even the title is wrong (the election? Y,ere must have been multiple presidential elections in 2012, France, for example). Paranoid navel-staring essay. Does not meet any notability guideline that I am aware of. --Randykitty (talk) 22:15, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pretty much random thoughts and minor incidents and statements. Secondary sources have not said that people outside of the USA had much influence at all on the election. Some of the examples probably had the opposite effect intended, for instance Hugo Chavez's "endorsement" of Obama. Steve Dufour (talk) 22:19, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While I'd normally agree with Go_Phitins! view, if you stripped away the OR, SYNTH and COATRACK, there'd be nothing left. --Dweller (talk) 22:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That's pretty much why I struck it. There'd literally be a few thes, ands, and buts, but not much else. Go Phightins! 22:30, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Looks like a WP:HOAX if anything --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 23:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, cleanup, rename Foreign money in United States elections. I deleted all of other speculations, but this one seems to be valid legal topic . Staszek Lem (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.