Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of marginal seats in the 2015 Canadian federal 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. czar 15:29, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of marginal seats in the 2015 Canadian federal election

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article has been in existence for five years and has never had any references. Not only are there no references for the specific facts and figures quoted in the article, there is no reference that says what a "marginal seat" is, how it is defined or even if such an entity exists in Canadian political science. The entire subject is WP:OR and fails WP:GNG. Ahunt (talk) 15:20, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 15:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I de-prodded this since Simon Fraser includes this information, see [1], but I haven't yet found it for 2015. I figured it'd be good to give it a week to see if it can be sourced and probably merged into the proper election article. This is information we carry all the time for countries like Australia and the UK, but I'm now realising "marginal seats" may be geographical (was surprised at the "lack of definition" because it's absolutely obvious to me) as it looks like this is called "target ridings" in Canada. No !vote yet since I haven't exhausted a source search. SportingFlyer T·C 15:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Figures were originally derived from Elections Canada data on their website. I've attempted on occasion to find out if any academic research has been undertaken to help firm up this article, but have been disappointed by the lack of interest out there. If anyone can discover content of that kind, it would be greatly appreciated.Raellerby (talk) 17:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Just a selection of the closest results of Results of the 2015 Canadian federal election by riding. Perhaps the ten closest races (within 1%) can be highlighted on that article but this doesn't appear to need a separate one. Reywas92^Talk 20:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It could be merged somewhere if it can be sourced. I'm really less interested than I seem, but I know other countries use "ladders" to represent how marginal a seat is (off Wikipedia) and I was extremely surprised Canada didn't have one as well. SportingFlyer T·C 22:40, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "Marginal" is not an official classification AFAIK. It will also be different for every election. We'd also have to have List of landslide victories in the 2015 Canadian federal election, with an equally arbitrary percentage criterion. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:55, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's a shame the Canadian election results article is so poorly formatted, this information could easily be included there as a sortable list. SportingFlyer T·C 12:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a very unscientific vote not backed up by process - but I just spent 30 minutes using this article as a jumping-off point to find out what happened in some of these marginal results. Fascinating reading - and I wouldn't have had that chance without this article.--Concertmusic (talk) 00:44, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: You need to specify a policy reason for why we should keep an unsourced article. See also WP:ILIKEIT. - Ahunt (talk) 00:53, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Missvain (talk) 15:51, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Original research. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 18:18, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unsourced original research, just listing statistics without contextualizing why anybody would need them to be documented for posterity. Also, incidentally, "marginal seat" isn't a Canadian political terminology at all — it's an attempt to import a British term into Canadian political discourse, not a thing that Canadian media talk about under that name, so even if there were a valid reason to keep this, it would still have to be retitled. (Yes, Canadian media do talk about "target ridings", with essentially the same "the result was close last time so the second-place party is dedicating extra resources to trying to flip the seat this time" meaning, but they don't analyze or contextualize the "target ridings" as a defined group that has any special or enduring significance as a group.) Also, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Contentious ridings in the Canadian federal election, 2011, which was deleted for similar reasons. Bearcat (talk) 17:14, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:OR and lack of importance. Shankargb (talk) 18:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete while very interesting topic, there are no sources and this article isn't new.VR _talk 19:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a list of the closest results in the 2015 election would be reasonable content to merge to Results of the 2015 Canadian federal election by riding, but that's not what this is. This is the closest results from the 2011 election when adjusted to the new boundaries, according to ... somebody (some of the linked articles reference http://www.punditsguide.ca , which gives me a database error; SportingFlyer gives a working link to the website of a Canadian professor of political science). I don't see how this is notable as a topic. power~enwiki (πぱい, νにゅー) 03:11, 23 December 2020 (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.