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