Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert F. Kennedy presidential campaign, 1968

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 keep. John254 00:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Robert F. Kennedy presidential campaign, 1968

Excessively detailed content fork, also contains some original research. A certain skunk placed a PROD reading "Unnecessarily detailed article about non-notable subtopic of Robert F. Kennedy. Information in this article should be merged with the main topic.", which was nuked by an IP without commentary, so I'm listing it here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 05:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article doesn't seem excessively detailed to me, but it does seem to lack sufficient references. The article definitely warrants improvement. Rray (talk) 05:59, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~Merge and~~ Delete: Like most presidential campaigns, there isn't anything terribly newsworthy about this particular campaign. Notable content about the campaign can easily be merged with the Robert F. Kennedy article. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Merge and delete" are incompatible with the GFDL and thus invalid AFD votes. --Dhartung | Talk 06:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Um... okay. Changed to just "Delete" then. :P — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:01, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Other than the fact that...you know...he was assasinated in the middle of it?

Keep and reference. This was one of the more remarkable "insurgent" presidential campaigns of the century and was far different from the plodding by-the-numbers campaigns that all candidates run today (owing much to television and changes in delegate allocation). Kennedy's entry into the 1968 race changed the dynamic considerably and even absent his assassination is historically notable. --Dhartung | Talk 06:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep...but complete it. This is one of the more notable campaigns of the 20th century. (The fact that RFK was virtually the complete opposite of JFK meant that he had to basically reinvent the wheel when it came to campaigning). The article, however, is incomplete. --Smashville^BONK! 15:36, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, complete and reference. The article may need some work, but saying it was a "non-notable" presidential campaign is laughable. The topic is notable on its face. Justin ^chat 17:42, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and finish it. Make certain that the article also links to United States presidential election, 1968. The topic seems fairly obviously worthy. There is quite a bit of literature to draw on. -Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In the minds of most people, RFK is just one of a bunch of people assassinated that year. This article places his presidential ambitions within a meaningful context and demonstrates how his murder changed the face of both the Democratic primary and the Presidential election itself. Alansohn (talk) 18:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Extremely significant historical period. Issues regarding sourcing, content, etc. can be handled at the article level. For this topic there is likely no shortage of them. 23skidoo (talk) 20:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Robert F. Kennedy, I don't see why this should be splitted, it's not alot of info there Secret ^account 22:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Again, excessively-detailed is not a crime. No reason that this can't co-exist with both the RFK article and the 1968 US election article, especially given the significance of RFK's run for the presidency. Not a great article as of yet, but a great topic about the only American presidential candidate whose campaign was cut short by his assassination, and that was after he won the California primary. Entire books have been written about the campaign of the man who might have been king. Mandsford (talk) 02:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per reliable sources, this former assistant to Sen. Joe McCarthy ran as a liberal and forced an incumbent President to drop out of the race, then got assassinated. Pretty remarkable and easily worthy of a stand-alone article. Edison (talk) 07:19, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep a historic campaign which can be expanded.--S TX 01:35, 15 December 2007 (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.