Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond Cho

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. —Korath (Talk) 14:19, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Raymond Cho

If local city councillors are not inherently noteworthy, what makes this council member who has lost multiple Canadian Federal Elections encyclopedic and worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia? Have I just answered my own question? GRider\^talk 21:39, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, 420 Google hits ("Raymond Cho" + "Toronto" ) - just under the bar of notability. Megan1967 02:35, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep--This article passes (barely) the threshold required to have a separate article about a local elected official of a large city. And I challenge you to show me any sort of consensus that local city councillors are not inherently worthy article topics; Wikipedia:Deletion policy/Local politicians seems to be split in a poorly attended vote. Meelar (talk) 06:55, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • That's not a vote, Meelar, it is a discussion to form consensus. Anyway I'll have to agree with Megan on this Cho guy, and delete. Radiant! 09:41, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
    • GRider seemed to taken as a given that city councillors aren't inherently notable, so I was addressing the comment more to him. Best, Meelar (talk) 04:53, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)
      • Okay, I agree that since that discussion isn't complete yet, it cannot be taken as consensus either way yet. Radiant! 10:58, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep: I've cleaned up the article and added more information. Cho is quite a character. I'll see if I can find more about his run in the 2004 federal election. That certainly made him notable in Toronto. Kevintoronto 14:03, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Wikipedia does not have a notability requirement, only a verifiability requirement. All the information here is easily verifiable. - SimonP 15:40, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, it does. 'Not notable' is a common argument on VfD. Deletion policy links to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not which discusses it. Quote, "Biography articles should only be for people with some sort of notoriety or achievement." Also, apart from verifiability, an article needs to be informative and neutral (that's stated in the page on verifiability). Radiant! 10:58, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
    • Being elected to city council is pretty clearly an achievement. - SimonP 15:50, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, mabye there should be a notability requirement--nixie 00:06, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep --Spinboy 23:31, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep in its current form. Wikipedia is not paper and city councillors are notable enough, especially for large cities where they are known by more people. --Deathphoenix 04:53, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Even if city councillors aren't inherently notable (and I'd say they should be, in the case of Canada's largest city), Cho is. His decision to run as an Independent Liberal in 2004 was related to a broader series of divisions affecting the Liberal Party of Canada in the same period (albeit that Cho's "involvement" in the Liberal Party was dubious to begin with; some have said he was just trying to confuse people). The fact that he placed second in one of Canada's safest Liberal seats is enough to raise him about the bar. CJCurrie 06:16, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The Recycling Troll 09:54, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.