Talk:Maine Question 1 (2009)
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Map of Maine
[edit]Can we please have a map of Maine loaded-up on here to show were the counties/districts of Maine that "approved" or "rejected" Question 1. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.207.230 (talk) 00:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Notability
[edit]Countless news outlets have reported on Question 1. Therefore, I believe this article's topic is quite notable, and the tag questioning its notability should be removed. That said, the article could definitely be improved upon. Articles for ballot measures in other states can be referred to for comparison. The article Proposition 8 stands as a wonderful example of the kind of work that can be done. — Athelwulf [T]/[C] 21:01, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter what other people have written. The content of this article establishes its notability. I have no doubt that the topic itself is notable, but the article itself must be improved before the tag could be removed. --haha169 (talk) 22:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
- Then maybe I don't fully understand what WP:NOTE says, or how it's usually implemented. This topic seems to meet the listed criteria. And under WP:FAILN, the point is made that a topic can be notable even if its article doesn't establish notability. So the issue, to me, seems to be whether the topic is notable, per se, and not whether the article has established this notability (unless too much time has passed, I suppose). Is this not actual Wikipedia practice? — Athelwulf [T]/[C] 19:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- The subject is notable and already has it's own article (Same-sex marriage in Maine, which I have proposed it be merged into) but IMO as the articled stands now, the question is just another question on a state ballot, but if it's expanded my opinion can be swayed. Mr Radio Guy !!! 01:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
- Then maybe I don't fully understand what WP:NOTE says, or how it's usually implemented. This topic seems to meet the listed criteria. And under WP:FAILN, the point is made that a topic can be notable even if its article doesn't establish notability. So the issue, to me, seems to be whether the topic is notable, per se, and not whether the article has established this notability (unless too much time has passed, I suppose). Is this not actual Wikipedia practice? — Athelwulf [T]/[C] 19:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)