- 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) Lourdes 03:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Impeachment proposal against Michel Temer
- Impeachment proposal against Michel Temer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
So far, nothing has actually happened, and there's no telling if something will really happen with this. It is routinary for huge numbers of bill proposals to get lost in the internal bureaucracy of a national Congress and never get it to an actual vote of the legislators, much less get sanctioned as laws. Do not confuse with the Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff that made Temer the current president of Brazil, which is a completely different thing (as it happened, and was approved). Cambalachero ( talk) 15:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep.
- Factual: the outcome of an impeachment proposal is irrelevant; the proposal(s) exists.
- Notable: Temer is the President of Brazil, not interim president. Past, present, or future impeachment proposals/investigations are of interest to WP, perhaps more so now.
- Sourced: the article is decently sourced. O Globo and the BBC are reliable news sources. Prburley ( talk) 15:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep.
I, respecfully, propose that the Portuguese version should be deleted first. Since you, Cambalachero , speak Portuguese, why not go direct to the source and try to propose the delectation there. If accepted there, where Mr. Temer is known, and the editors are familiar with the process, your argument here will be taken as a serious proposal. Dr. Loo Talk to me 16:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Existence. The mere existence of a bill proposal does not mean that it will actually make it to the chambers and be discussed and voted. That's not the way Congresses work. If all the comitee work is done and the Congress of Brazil actually comes to vote for the impeachment of Temer, then it may be noteworthy. Nowadays, it's just a proposal like many others, and there is no guarantee that it will ever see the green light.
- Also, I do not speak Portuguese, I can't read their article. Is this article outdated, is the impeachment in a more advanced stage than reported here? If so, please elaborate. Also have in mind
Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Wikipedias in other languages.
Cambalachero (
talk) 16:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Not a problem. Google Translate handles Portuguese surprisingly well. This timeline will help you out, which is also at the bottom of the Portuguese-language article: Linha de tempo do processo de impeachment de Michel Temer (Timeline of Michel Temer impeachment process). Good luck! Prburley ( talk) 18:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per Prburley's arguments above. This is a no brainer. giso6150 ( talk) 17:52, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per Prburley's arguments above. This is a no brainer. -- Panam2014 ( talk) 21:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep This is an important proposal, with enough sources. ~ EDDY ( talk/ contribs)~ 16:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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) Lourdes 03:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Impeachment proposal against Michel Temer
- Impeachment proposal against Michel Temer ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
So far, nothing has actually happened, and there's no telling if something will really happen with this. It is routinary for huge numbers of bill proposals to get lost in the internal bureaucracy of a national Congress and never get it to an actual vote of the legislators, much less get sanctioned as laws. Do not confuse with the Impeachment of Dilma Rousseff that made Temer the current president of Brazil, which is a completely different thing (as it happened, and was approved). Cambalachero ( talk) 15:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep.
- Factual: the outcome of an impeachment proposal is irrelevant; the proposal(s) exists.
- Notable: Temer is the President of Brazil, not interim president. Past, present, or future impeachment proposals/investigations are of interest to WP, perhaps more so now.
- Sourced: the article is decently sourced. O Globo and the BBC are reliable news sources. Prburley ( talk) 15:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep.
I, respecfully, propose that the Portuguese version should be deleted first. Since you, Cambalachero , speak Portuguese, why not go direct to the source and try to propose the delectation there. If accepted there, where Mr. Temer is known, and the editors are familiar with the process, your argument here will be taken as a serious proposal. Dr. Loo Talk to me 16:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Existence. The mere existence of a bill proposal does not mean that it will actually make it to the chambers and be discussed and voted. That's not the way Congresses work. If all the comitee work is done and the Congress of Brazil actually comes to vote for the impeachment of Temer, then it may be noteworthy. Nowadays, it's just a proposal like many others, and there is no guarantee that it will ever see the green light.
- Also, I do not speak Portuguese, I can't read their article. Is this article outdated, is the impeachment in a more advanced stage than reported here? If so, please elaborate. Also have in mind
Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Wikipedias in other languages.
Cambalachero (
talk) 16:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Not a problem. Google Translate handles Portuguese surprisingly well. This timeline will help you out, which is also at the bottom of the Portuguese-language article: Linha de tempo do processo de impeachment de Michel Temer (Timeline of Michel Temer impeachment process). Good luck! Prburley ( talk) 18:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per Prburley's arguments above. This is a no brainer. giso6150 ( talk) 17:52, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per Prburley's arguments above. This is a no brainer. -- Panam2014 ( talk) 21:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 07:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
- Keep This is an important proposal, with enough sources. ~ EDDY ( talk/ contribs)~ 16:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- 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.