Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Center for Range Voting (2nd nomination)

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 merge to Range voting. Consensus has been established, no need for further discussion after the earlier relist Fritzpoll (talk) 08:50, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Center for Range Voting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Delete. non-notable per this debate. Cordyceps2009 (talk) 21:43, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep. nomination by single-purpose account, registered and immediately filed, only edits are this nomination. The discussion cited was in 2006, the sources in the present article were not available then. The nominator then was also an SPA, Yellowbeard dedicated to AfDing topics related to Range voting, subsequently indef blocked for disruption. I'll file a sock report, new editors don't ordinarily immediately dive into AfD process. --Abd (talk) 01:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• True, new accounts don't usually do that, but have you considered it might be an IP editor that has been here a while, but registered because IP's can't nominate an article for deletion? (Yet another reason to require registration). Niteshift36 (talk) 07:03, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 02:47, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to range voting. Insufficient notability for stand-alone article. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I have no problem with a merge, given how little information there is in the article, but that's an ordinary editorial decision, it doesn't require an AfD. With a merge, if more RS appears, the article can easily be brought back, it's far better than a deletion, and far more useful to readers, since, if they look up the Center, they will find the information. If it were deleted, they would get nothing. We can't merge while it's under AfD, so .... --Abd (talk) 12:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Center for Range Voting (2nd nomination)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fritzpoll (talk) 17:03, 19 July 2009 (UTC)Center for Range Voting (2nd nomination)[reply]

• Merge and redirect to range voting. Insufficient content for stand-alone article. Borderline notability. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:23, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect per SJ above. Verbal chat 08:31, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect There are three refs in the article that could show notability.

1. from The Nation looks like high quality and says "Nonetheless, range voting has received next to no support in academia or the real world. The Center for Range Voting is little more than the pet project of former Temple University mathematician Warren Smith, without whom range voting would probably be unknown (even to Poundstone)."[1].
2. acceptable as high quality too, a book from columnist and skeptic William Poundstone, it explains the problems with voting systems, and it defends the usage of Range Voting to solve them.
3. local US newspaper, it asks a co-founder of the center about using range voting for US elections instead of normal voting, it's not an article talking about the center. So, enough notability to keep the redirect, and to have a section in Range voting. Not enough notability for its own article. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:34, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. This is what Poundstone writes about the Center for Range Voting in his book Gaming the Vote: "In 2005, Warren Smith started his own Center for Range Voting. Despite the soundalike name, this 'Center' is basically just a website (www.rangevoting.org)." According to Alexa, this site is ranked 3,019,967 [2]. Cordyceps2009 (talk) 19:46, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and re-direct as above. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:03, 22 July 2009 (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.