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 Delete—clear consensus and so forth. — Deckiller 23:41, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Next constitution of Zimbabwe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced, dated stub. Note that this would empty its category. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as I understand the value of this info is 50% less each successive day. Virtually superseded by 2008–2009 Zimbabwean political negotiations. Per its last few grafs, apparently by Feb 09 it was just a constitutional amendment and thus not fitting the title, and there's no reason to retain the title. Merge the category there as a decent expandable category and the only "value" remaining. JJB 04:02, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Zimbabwe-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:57, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and empty per above, WP:CRYSTAL, and WP:HAMMER. Bearian (talk) 19:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I guess if you mean literally the "next constitution of Zimbabwe" and not just the process originally in view by the article creator, Hammer's law does apply! There is not now any track order! JJB 19:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Sven Manguard _Talk 01:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.