Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Robinson (politician)

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 of the debate was laid upon the table. Titoxd^(?!?) 01:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jennifer Robinson (politician)

Local politician. Hard to search for due to a common name but I have not found any widespread press coverage so fails WP:BIO. Delete. TerriersFan 01:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• No, no, no per nom - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:06, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Yay Nay per nom AdamBiswanger1 02:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom IslaySolomon 02:41, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, maybe if the mayor (or not even then), but definitely not at the moment. SM247^{My Talk} 03:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails WP:BIO. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 03:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete State office, maybe. Town council? Afraid that's not enough. --DarkAudit 03:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Previous attempt to delete in June 2005 was only half-submitted. Fireplace 04:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• DeleteWeak keep per discussion at the previous AfD.--Kchase02 T 07:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Err ... so two people ignored WP:BIO to vote keep, and that's a reason to keep now? "Political figures holding international, national or statewide/provincewide office or members of a national, state or provincial legislature." A city councilman in North Carolina, that doesn't cut it. Heck, not all the city councilmen in Boston and NYC have articles. RGTraynor 08:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• I know. It is a guideline. She represents over 20,000 people and has been in office for close to ten years. That's pretty close to the freshmen state reps that WP:BIO protects.--Kchase02 T 09:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• And the notion of a "guideline" is that we ought to be guided by it unless there's a compelling reason not to be, not that it can be thrown away whenever convenient. No doubt there's some elected head dogcatcher who works for a city of 500,000 and has been in office for fifty years, but as it stands, the standard is that state legislators are considered notable by definition, and municipal ones aren't. RGTraynor 18:25, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• I am persuaded. I think I have a bias in favor of people from politics and government, but since this discussion illuminated it, I should be able to check my bias better. Thanks.--Kchase02 T 19:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Most town council folks don't need articles unless they really make news somehow. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:16, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. No evidence of notability beyond being on a city council, which is a position that is not inherently worthy of inclusion. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 13:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia does not need to have articles on small-town councilpersons without another compelling reason. JChap 20:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:BIO -- Alias Flood 23:57, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. -- Scientizzle 00:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I hope that User:Seth Ilys, a longtime admin and rather prolific contributor who happens to have created the article at hand, might drop in and perhaps explain why he thought/thinks the subject to be notable (one imagines there may information not in the article that would suggest notability, but a cursory Googling doesn't demonstrate any). In the meanwhile/in the absence of any compelling new information, the nom, et al., seem altogether correct. Joe 05:56, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn politician hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 13:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I've never nominated an AfD, don't think I know how, but hope someone will have a look at Tim Crutchfield. I've been asking the author to reference it for months. Not sure it's notable. Sandy 20:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - I will put forward an AfD for you. TerriersFan 21:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment - BTW users on here need to be aware of a new policy WP:NNOT that is being proposed. TerriersFan 21:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment That doesn't apply here. A city councilperson doesn't mean much to a person in the next state, let alone on the other side of the world, if that is all the person is being entered for. --DarkAudit 00:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:BIO.--John Lake 00:51, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Unless the city council does something of great notoriety or notability, city councilpersons fall under the "indiscriminate collection of information" clause. Captainktainer * Talk 00:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

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.