Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anything But Conservative

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. (non-admin closure) Ifnord (talk) 17:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anything But Conservative

[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)

Not a really notable topic. The lead calls it a "political campaign" but that's really overselling it; while strategic voting amongst left-leaning voters in Canada undeniably exists, it exists as a state of mind rather than an organized effort. For instance, the 2015 election's ABC campaign apparently consisted of "several websites" and "thousands of grass-roots volunteers"— which is not really much of anything.

The exception to this is the 2008 election, which did have a major, notable, organized effort led by the Premier of Newfoundland— but that event can be covered just as well on the relevant pages (2008 Canadian federal election, Danny Williams (politician), etc). As it stands, this page is taking one notable political event and using it to suggest a wider, broader, more notable "movement" than really exists. — Kawnhr (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. — Kawnhr (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. — Kawnhr (talk) 19:31, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Jerry Dias was one of the guests of the first segment of The Agenda on November 25; he specifically stated that Unifor in its past had advocated an "Anything But Conservative" voting strategy, for whatever that's worth. See The PC Party's labour charm offensive at TVO. (I see a similar point about Unifor members voting strategically is made in the article, but has no sources.) Mind matrix 20:27, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - on the surface it doesn't seem notable, but digging through the references from major publications suggests otherwise. Nfitz (talk) 01:09, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Strategic Voting as this is not so much an orchestrated campaign as a system of messaging surrounding that phenomenon deployed within Canadian elections. Simonm223 (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:02, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The sources are good and in depth.Super (talk) 00:34, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - A merge to Tactical voting could be plausible, but the article is large enough on its own to the point that merging would give it WP:UNDUE weight without removal of important, sourced information. -"Ghost of Dan Gurney" 07:22, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:54, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I remember seeing tons of lawn signs and hearing a lot about this movement in WP:OFFLINE sources around 2008, and I'm convinced that notability is met. There's no need to fold a notable topic related to an election into the election's page. However, the sources I'm seeing online suggest that this existed as a coherent movement in 2008 and maybe 2015, and I think the topic of this article should narrowly be about the movement (backed by prominent politicians, covered extensively in the media) to oppose Conservatives in those two elections. See for examples 1 2 3 4 5 6, I see basically nothing about the movement existing in any election before or since. - Astrophobe (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2021 (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.