Ray Saintonge wrote:
I agree that it's appropriate to cover all election. We can end up carrying material that nobody else has. There can be no hard rule about what is relevant in human knowledge. We can only have guidelines that tend to be accepted by the community. I tend to favour a broad interpretation of what is worth including. Changing that standard could be a problem when we prepare a publishable version.
One of my big goals in the push for 1.0 is that as we do so, we shouldn't change our minds about organically grown and mature customs on Wikipedia proper. We've always been pretty lax about what counts as "worth having an article on", and we should continue.
That is, just because some topic doesn't make the cut for 1.0 for whatever reason, that's no reason to not include it on the website. And future versions (2.0 Electronic) could include that stuff after a review.
So, I agree. Elections anywhere in the world, so long as they are verifiable, can surely be legitimate.
--Jimbo