Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Democratically elected

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. Duplicates additional subjects; WP:FORK even WP:DICDEF (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Democratically elected

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

This short unreferenced article is bordering wiktionary. Is there anything else to say that "democratically elected" means "elected democratically"? Soman (talk) 21:00, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Redirect to democracy, dictionary def of a sentence fragment - what exactly is this "democratically elected" entity? Tim Vickers (talk) 21:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as alternate title, now Ed has explained what the subject he intended was, I see no substantial difference from the topic of the article election. Not a probable search term, so no need for a redirect. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have all the respect in the world for Ed Poor, who was one of the founding fathers for my favorite internet site of all time. I think that there is a potential for this to be expanded, albeit with a different title. Democratic elections are defined by whoever happens to be making the rules. Some of the most repressive regimes in the world-- the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and the German Democratic Republic, for instance -- have professed to have people power, the literal translation of democracy. Then there are variations like Indonesia's "Guided Democracy". There are different directions in which political science majors can take this one. Mandsford 23:47, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. There is no "Elections" section in Democracy, and the point of the article I created is to track which people or governments were (or were not) elected according to their country's rules. Then there's also the issue of coups and overthrows, as in "the CIA helped overthrow the democratically elected government of X". Our readers want to know why the "most democratic country in the world" would do something so strange as to thwart the will of another country's people ... or whatever, which is the context in which I've seen the phrase democratically elected the most. See especially Covert United States foreign regime change actions. --Uncle Ed (talk) 00:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - but I don't see how having a separate article on democratically elected helps to settle issues in the US regime change article? As per creating a list of democratic and non-democratic govts, thats a pov minefield. How about (as pointed out by Mansford above) the Indonesian coup of 1965? Sukarno had indeed been democratically elected, but mandate extended, etc.. How about Turkey? Are elections in a state with a 10% threshold really democratic? What about Colombia, where there is on one hand multiparty election but at the same time the state is engaged in physically eliminating critics? --Soman (talk) 00:47, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ed seems to want to write the article democratic election. However, I can't see how this would differ from the major subject of the article election. Tim Vickers (talk) 01:55, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - redundant to election, but not a common search term, so no redirect. Hekerui (talk) 13:52, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Seems you don't want to have this article at all, because you are pessimistic about whether we can write neutrally about multiple points of view. Well, the NPOV policy tells us exactly how to do that, and I have plenty of experience working with others: see WP:TEAMWORK for more on techniques of collaboration, and 1973 Chile coup for an example of one of my first and most successful collaborations with my fellow Wikipedians. --Uncle Ed (talk) 00:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I think it would be easy to avoid personal POV on this one, since the United Nations members have been monitoring multiparty elections for many years, and there are internationally accepted standards for democratically elected governments. Any such article would need to recognize that the definition of a "true" democracy varies from one state to the next, but the terms for participation are usually codified within the national constitution. In the People's Republic of China and other one-party states, the theory of democracy is that people have the right to vote yes-or-no on the candidates who have been selected (indirectly) by everyone through the people's party. Even in multi-party states, the idea of democratically-elected government is tempered by restrictions on who is eligible to vote. Still, I can't help but wonder whether these ideas are already covered elsewhere. Mandsford 13:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—the subject of this article is redundant to democracy and election. "Democratically elected" is too vague between the two to be a redirect to either, and a WP:DAB page seems overkill: let the search engine handle it. –Grondemar 00:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - redundant to democracy and election, arguably a POV fork. Redirect to democracy may be sensible, but I'm not sure how frequent a search term it is. Claritas § 11:14, 19 June 2010 (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.