589:
sufficiently "notable" for the
Nebraska gubernatorial page, and should be included in external links. These are not "link farms"; they are legitimate ways for non-incumbents to let voters know about their websites and their campaigns. I have added many, many external links for candidates myself -- in many states -- because I believe in helping non-incumbents. The incumbents and party favorites have plenty of opportunity to be heard and to have their websites found -- it is the NON-incumbents, and the outsider challengers, who need links from Knowledge (XXG). Deleting those links hurts non-incumbents. In other words, Knowledge (XXG) fights "incumbency protection" and deleting candidate website links helps support "incumbency protection." Why would anyone want to do that?
538:. Since when is such considered a binding consensus? These lists were put in place years ago because so many candidates had their articles deleted because they were purportedly "non-notable". Claims that those articles would be "merged" into the election articles proved to be lies. "speedy deletions" were timed for the exact time required for the "required discussion" for reinstatement to end right after the election. Efforts to include each candidate's campaign site, financial information, Project Vote Smart et al within the election article itself were deleted. Efforts to create redirects for candidate names to point to election articles were deleted. iow,
612:(as there were 8 candidates when I first checked and only 7 linked, and of the 7 linked, one was a dead page - some people are candidates and do not have an official campaign website - giving hence undue weight to the other people in those lists). Moreover, we are talking about the election, not about the individual campaigns. These links are indirectly related to the election. They are more directly linked to the person who runs the campaign (the candidate himself, and in fact, some of the campaign pages are already linked from the candidate's pages - though even there one could consider them indirect).
304:
273:
245:
314:
407:
169:
82:
142:
64:
179:
475:
419:
443:
33:
667:- with one small lead section, and then (in alphabetical order) sections for the 8 candidates, referencing their main statements, and on such an article links to the campaign websites may be includable (though one would still be having the problem that if one of the # candidates does not have a functional campaign website, that that inclusion would also give
588:
There are rules for qualifying for a gubernatorial candidacy in
Nebraska, as there are in every state, and those rules are challenging, usually thousands of voter signatures from many counties in a short period of time. Anyone who accomplishes the qualifying process should automatically be considered
654:
Note, all the candidates are mentioned in the text, thát is where the focus should be. If avoiding incumbent protection is your goal, then at least these lists should be complete - if they are not, and (on my first encounter) it is completely not, then those lists should simply not be there.
507:. I find them a plain violation of the standards against linkfarming, and these links are indirect. As this is, apparently, 'standard' (which it is not), I think that a local discussion does not really help - therefore the noticeboard discussion. --
765:
740:
344:
695:
715:
770:
361:
690:
254:
152:
107:
89:
69:
760:
397:
452:
287:
735:
720:
387:
351:
750:
235:
775:
710:
356:
705:
225:
730:
755:
725:
327:
278:
201:
551:
745:
700:
339:
664:
516:
Do note that one of the campaign-links is dead, and one is a redirect to a facebook page (and we have 7 links for 8 candidates). --
432:
283:
192:
147:
335:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
44:
645:
reasons, then please go ahead, but the statement 'is standard on election pages' is not an inclusion criterion. --
594:
484:
If someone drops out or loses, do not erase them; rather, refer to them as having run and lost, dropped out, etc.
547:
50:
555:
527:
17:
200:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
590:
319:
675:
649:
620:
598:
580:
571:
I see no policy-based argument for making exceptions to the consensus that applies to such cases. --
559:
520:
511:
32:
543:
668:
663:, everything between that should be strictly avoided. Also note, one could consider an article
303:
272:
93:, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to
630:
609:
504:
101:
634:
624:
605:
565:
244:
424:
184:
638:
576:
178:
168:
141:
81:
63:
684:
672:
646:
531:
517:
508:
332:
546:
aka trees not forest. I'm curious to hear how these actions are supposed to support
406:
627:). We are not here to promote the candidates, we are writing an encyclopedia here.
615:
Note that statements like "it is the NON-incumbents, and the outsider challengers,
474:
414:
309:
174:
641:
is a guideline with longstanding consensus - if one can show me policy based
105:
and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit
572:
535:
331:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
197:
95:
442:
469:
26:
441:
405:
243:
608:, and, as for example in this case, even a violation of
659:
of the campaign links is just as neutral as mentioning
481:
This is a historical article, not a daily tally sheet.
117:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject
Elections and Referendums
196:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
766:
Unknown-importance United States governors articles
741:C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
665:Nebraska gubernatorial election campaigns, 2014
696:WikiProject Elections and Referendums articles
120:Template:WikiProject Elections and Referendums
716:Unknown-importance American politics articles
8:
771:WikiProject United States governors articles
530:consisted only of some personal opinions of
505:WP:EL/N#"is standard on all elections pages"
691:C-Class Elections and Referendums articles
604:These are plain linkfarms in violation of
267:
136:
58:
18:Talk:Nebraska gubernatorial election, 2014
372:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States
761:C-Class United States governors articles
619:" (my bolding) is a plain violation of
269:
138:
60:
30:
736:Low-importance United States articles
721:American politics task force articles
90:WikiProject Elections and Referendums
7:
751:Unknown-importance Nebraska articles
325:This article is within the scope of
210:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Politics
190:This article is within the scope of
87:This article is within the scope of
617:who need links from Knowledge (XXG)
49:It is of interest to the following
776:WikiProject United States articles
711:C-Class American politics articles
540:too hot, too col, too wet, too dry
375:Template:WikiProject United States
123:Elections and Referendums articles
25:
706:Low-importance politics articles
473:
417:
312:
302:
271:
177:
167:
140:
80:
62:
31:
392:This article has been rated as
230:This article has been rated as
731:C-Class United States articles
1:
756:WikiProject Nebraska articles
726:WikiProject Politics articles
676:05:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
650:05:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
599:03:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
581:18:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
560:14:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
450:This article is supported by
430:This article is supported by
252:This article is supported by
213:Template:WikiProject Politics
204:and see a list of open tasks.
521:19:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
512:18:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
255:American politics task force
495:I have brought the case of
792:
637:are 2 of our pillars, and
453:WikiProject U.S. governors
398:project's importance scale
236:project's importance scale
746:C-Class Nebraska articles
701:C-Class politics articles
449:
413:
391:
328:WikiProject United States
297:
251:
229:
162:
114:Elections and Referendums
75:
70:Elections and Referendums
57:
333:United States of America
446:
410:
378:United States articles
248:
39:This article is rated
445:
409:
247:
43:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
623:(part of the pillar
550:of Knowledge (XXG).
433:WikiProject Nebraska
320:United States portal
193:WikiProject Politics
528:discussion at WP:EL
346:Articles Requested!
499:external links on
447:
411:
249:
45:content assessment
488:
487:
468:
467:
464:
463:
460:
459:
266:
265:
262:
261:
216:politics articles
135:
134:
131:
130:
16:(Redirected from
783:
477:
470:
427:
422:
421:
420:
380:
379:
376:
373:
370:
322:
317:
316:
315:
306:
299:
298:
293:
290:
275:
268:
218:
217:
214:
211:
208:
187:
182:
181:
171:
164:
163:
158:
155:
144:
137:
125:
124:
121:
118:
115:
108:our project page
102:electoral reform
84:
77:
76:
66:
59:
42:
36:
35:
27:
21:
791:
790:
786:
785:
784:
782:
781:
780:
681:
680:
591:JesseAlanGordon
493:
425:Nebraska portal
423:
418:
416:
377:
374:
371:
368:
367:
366:
352:Become a Member
318:
313:
311:
291:
281:
215:
212:
209:
206:
205:
185:Politics portal
183:
176:
156:
150:
122:
119:
116:
113:
112:
40:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
789:
787:
779:
778:
773:
768:
763:
758:
753:
748:
743:
738:
733:
728:
723:
718:
713:
708:
703:
698:
693:
683:
682:
679:
678:
652:
628:
613:
586:
585:
584:
583:
569:
548:WP:FIVEPILLARS
492:
489:
486:
485:
483:
478:
466:
465:
462:
461:
458:
457:
448:
438:
437:
429:
428:
412:
402:
401:
394:Low-importance
390:
384:
383:
381:
365:
364:
359:
354:
349:
342:
340:Template Usage
336:
324:
323:
307:
295:
294:
292:Low‑importance
276:
264:
263:
260:
259:
250:
240:
239:
232:Low-importance
228:
222:
221:
219:
202:the discussion
189:
188:
172:
160:
159:
157:Low‑importance
145:
133:
132:
129:
128:
126:
85:
73:
72:
67:
55:
54:
48:
37:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
788:
777:
774:
772:
769:
767:
764:
762:
759:
757:
754:
752:
749:
747:
744:
742:
739:
737:
734:
732:
729:
727:
724:
722:
719:
717:
714:
712:
709:
707:
704:
702:
699:
697:
694:
692:
689:
688:
686:
677:
674:
673:Dirk Beetstra
670:
666:
662:
658:
653:
651:
648:
647:Dirk Beetstra
644:
640:
636:
632:
629:
626:
622:
618:
614:
611:
607:
603:
602:
601:
600:
596:
592:
582:
578:
574:
570:
567:
563:
562:
561:
557:
553:
552:71.23.178.214
549:
545:
541:
537:
533:
532:User:Beetstra
529:
525:
524:
523:
522:
519:
518:Dirk Beetstra
514:
513:
510:
509:Dirk Beetstra
506:
502:
498:
490:
482:
479:
476:
472:
471:
455:
454:
444:
440:
439:
435:
434:
426:
415:
408:
404:
403:
399:
395:
389:
386:
385:
382:
369:United States
363:
360:
358:
355:
353:
350:
348:
347:
343:
341:
338:
337:
334:
330:
329:
321:
310:
308:
305:
301:
300:
296:
289:
285:
280:
279:United States
277:
274:
270:
257:
256:
246:
242:
241:
237:
233:
227:
224:
223:
220:
203:
199:
195:
194:
186:
180:
175:
173:
170:
166:
165:
161:
154:
149:
146:
143:
139:
127:
110:
109:
104:
103:
98:
97:
92:
91:
86:
83:
79:
78:
74:
71:
68:
65:
61:
56:
52:
46:
38:
34:
29:
28:
19:
669:undue weight
660:
656:
642:
616:
587:
539:
515:
500:
496:
494:
480:
451:
431:
393:
357:Project Talk
345:
326:
253:
231:
191:
106:
100:
94:
88:
51:WikiProjects
655:Mentioning
526:I note the
685:Categories
621:WP:SOAPBOX
643:inclusion
544:WP:GAMING
536:User:Ronz
503:pages to
288:Governors
96:elections
501:election
497:campaign
491:Linkfarm
284:Nebraska
207:Politics
198:politics
153:American
148:Politics
631:WP:NPOV
610:WP:NPOV
564:Please
396:on the
234:on the
41:C-class
671:). --
635:WP:NOT
625:WP:NOT
606:WP:NOT
566:WP:FOC
362:Alerts
47:scale.
639:WP:EL
657:none
633:and
595:talk
577:talk
573:Ronz
556:talk
542:aka
534:and
661:all
388:Low
226:Low
687::
597:)
579:)
558:)
286:/
282::
151::
99:,
593:(
575:(
568:.
554:(
456:.
436:.
400:.
258:.
238:.
111:.
53::
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
