This article was nominated for deletion on June 23 2011. The result of the discussion was delete. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
User:Tiller54 and I apparently disagree on whether the description of Don Stenberg should mention his four previous attempts to win a U.S. Senate seat; he/she prefers only to list his present status as state treasurer and his past position as state attorney general.
I submit that Stenberg's perennial candidacy is indeed relevant to this article. First, it's a reason for listing him as a potential candidate, even if he himself has issued no statement on the matter. Second, it will affect his chances of winning if he does choose to run: on the one hand see, for example, this Politico article concerning his chances in the 2012 Republican primary; on the other, he's got tons of name recognition and a base of support from his previous runs, which one wouldn't expect from a state treasurer and former attorney general.
Stenberg's yearning for office is a byword among Nebraskans; I can't cite a source, but among my acquaintance, both Democrats and Republicans, the initial response to Rick Sheehy's resignation was "Now Stenberg will run". A description of Stenberg that doesn't include his frequent runs for the Senate is an incomplete one. Ammodramus ( talk) 15:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
User:Tiller54 and I disagree on the appropriate format for opinion-poll information. He/she has used in-text external links, under the names of the surveying organizations. I believe that the links should come in the form of formatted citations. Our two versions can be seen in this diff. Tiller54's edit summary was "Restore regular format for polling".
The in-text EL format appears contrary to WP:ELPOINTS, which states "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article", with a footnote that begins "Exceptions are rare...", and doesn't appear to comprehend this case in the list of rare exceptions. It's also contrary to WP:CITE, specifically to the subsection "Avoid embedded links".
I see no good reason for an exception to the EL policy in this case. ELs are subject to linkrot, and they don't convey as much information about the source as do formatted citations. It's possible that these and other points have been discussed elsewhere, and that a strong consensus has been reached among many editors for Tiller54's "regular format". If so, could we get a link to that discussion before restoration of the in-text ELs? Ammodramus ( talk) 19:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
They're all available through the ballotpedia link, so leave them out per WP:EL and WP:NOT (especially WP:NOTLINK and WP:NOTDIRECTORY). The websites all exist to promote the individuals, and will all likely be gone within a year. -- Ronz ( talk) 01:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on June 23 2011. The result of the discussion was delete. |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
User:Tiller54 and I apparently disagree on whether the description of Don Stenberg should mention his four previous attempts to win a U.S. Senate seat; he/she prefers only to list his present status as state treasurer and his past position as state attorney general.
I submit that Stenberg's perennial candidacy is indeed relevant to this article. First, it's a reason for listing him as a potential candidate, even if he himself has issued no statement on the matter. Second, it will affect his chances of winning if he does choose to run: on the one hand see, for example, this Politico article concerning his chances in the 2012 Republican primary; on the other, he's got tons of name recognition and a base of support from his previous runs, which one wouldn't expect from a state treasurer and former attorney general.
Stenberg's yearning for office is a byword among Nebraskans; I can't cite a source, but among my acquaintance, both Democrats and Republicans, the initial response to Rick Sheehy's resignation was "Now Stenberg will run". A description of Stenberg that doesn't include his frequent runs for the Senate is an incomplete one. Ammodramus ( talk) 15:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
User:Tiller54 and I disagree on the appropriate format for opinion-poll information. He/she has used in-text external links, under the names of the surveying organizations. I believe that the links should come in the form of formatted citations. Our two versions can be seen in this diff. Tiller54's edit summary was "Restore regular format for polling".
The in-text EL format appears contrary to WP:ELPOINTS, which states "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article", with a footnote that begins "Exceptions are rare...", and doesn't appear to comprehend this case in the list of rare exceptions. It's also contrary to WP:CITE, specifically to the subsection "Avoid embedded links".
I see no good reason for an exception to the EL policy in this case. ELs are subject to linkrot, and they don't convey as much information about the source as do formatted citations. It's possible that these and other points have been discussed elsewhere, and that a strong consensus has been reached among many editors for Tiller54's "regular format". If so, could we get a link to that discussion before restoration of the in-text ELs? Ammodramus ( talk) 19:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
They're all available through the ballotpedia link, so leave them out per WP:EL and WP:NOT (especially WP:NOTLINK and WP:NOTDIRECTORY). The websites all exist to promote the individuals, and will all likely be gone within a year. -- Ronz ( talk) 01:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)