Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Arjinderpal Sekhon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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: after discounting WP:SPAs, no consensus, the divisive point being whether major-party candidates are notable. --Sam Blanning(talk) 15:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Arjinderpal Sekhon

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

delete, yet another political nominee lacking WP:BIO and WP:C&E. Vectro 17:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete. Running for office does not make one notable. Kafziel Talk 17:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • DO NOT delete Beyond being the first South Asian American to run for that District's Congressional seat, Sekhon is also the only Sikh-American to be contesting a Congressional seat in this election. Mr. Sekhon is also a notable figure in South Asian-American politics, as evidenced by numerous fundraisers and speaking engagements being held for him across California and the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khalil78 (talk • contribs) 18:28, 17 October 2006
  • DO NOT delete. Dr. Sekhon is an Army Veteran running for Congress in California's District 2. This election is very important because Dr. Sekhon was the underdog in the Democratic primaries against Falzett, and now in the general election against Wally Herger. Also, as stated by the previous posting, he is the ONLY Sikh running for Congress in this upcoming election. If you would like more information on this candidate, then you can check out the links on the article that will direct you to his campaign website! --Gtorresjr 18:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Note This user is brand new and has only edited in regards to this deletion. HighInBC 18:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • If the only sources of information on a person are autobiographies, which includes blurbs published by candidates when standing for election, then the person does not satisfy our Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies. See Wikipedia:Autobiography for the problems with autobiographies. To warrant an article, it has to be demonstrated that this person satisfies the criteria. To do that, cite sources. Cite any independent biographies of this person have been published. Cite magazine feature articles that are on the subject of this person. Cite news articles that give this person significant, in-depth, coverage. Wikipedia is not a soapbox for promoting one's favourite election candidates. It is an encyclopaedia, and to have a biographical article on a person, that person must satisfy the criteria for biographical articles. Uncle G 18:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - fails WP:BIO. If/when he wins, then he'll qualify as notable. Just because he's a Sikh, and just because he's the only one running, doesn't give him any special notability. Now, on the other hand, if WP:BIO were satisfied by multiple independent media references, then that would be a different story. Understand: it's the media references that connote notability, not who/what he is. Akradecki 18:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • DO NOT delete. Dr. Sekhon is a Colonel in the United States Army Reserves. He is also the democratic candidate in the 2nd Congressional District of California. He is mentioned on the wikepedia page for Wally Herger and since Wikepedia serves as a site for people seeking information it only seems logical to include his information here so that voters can look him up and find information on him. I do not think that it is a controversial issue to include his bio and website info in this database. --User:Aks1015
    • Note This user is brand new and has only edited in regards to this deletion. Akradecki 19:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Please educate yourself about our policies before making such statments. This is an encyclopedia, not a database. Akradecki 19:03, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • DO NOT delete [editor already stated this aboveAkradecki 19:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)] The following link is an article on Arjinderpal's view on fighting to protect religious rights and freedom [1]—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtorresjr (talk • contribs) --Gtorresjr 19:31, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Note This user is brand new and has only edited in regards to this deletion. Kafziel Talk 19:22, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Why can't his information be edited so that I can include the articles that talk about his fight in protecting religious freedom? --Gtorresjr 19:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia is not a soapbox. This is not the place to campaign. Kafziel Talk 19:35, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
      • I am not campaigning. If your main argument in deleting this article is because it lacks media sources, then I was going to include additional cites and information. Each person can have a different interpretation as to whom is a hero in his or her community. I do not understand who makes you the judge of that? --Gtorresjr 19:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Well, I'm not the one who nominated it for deletion and I'm not the one who removed your external links, but both of those editors were correct in doing so. We have standards of quality and reliability for external links (you can see a general guideline here) and yours did not meet them. Kafziel Talk 19:43, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Well, I am glad that you are not the editor that deleted the posting. I will say, however, that I am not the person that wrote that original bio on Arjinderpal. I know that your site's information is modifiable and I was interested in adding more information in order to make it meet the site's guidelines and standards. I am not trying to campaign, but rather, educate people on who this member is in their community and what he has done for them and their country. That's all. --Gtorresjr 19:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, for same rationale provided in my prior prod deletion. Users favoring keep don't appear familiar with precedents such as WP:BIO or WP:C&E. "Currently running for Congress" equates to me as "not in Congress." There are thousands of people running for Congressional seats, and most of them don't stand a significant chance of passing WP:BIO until such time as they attain a seat. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, after all. Luna Santin 19:49, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I just tried to edit the article to conform to the guidelines by inserting more outside, third-party verifiable sources to lend credence to Mr. Sekhon's notability and expand upon the scope of his contributions and work outside of this election, but the page cannot be edited. What do those editors who are advocating deletion recommend to make the article more valuable and to save it from deletion? The discussion on candidates and elections, [[2]] clearly indicates that the fact that a candidate has not yet been elected is not, in and of itself, grounds for deletion.--Khalil78 20:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • I agree with this last posting. I have several articles that talk about Mr. Sekhon's campaign as well as him being a community advocate, which would make his article safe from deletion. --Gtorresjr 20:05, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Khalil78, that is a proposed guideline. It has no particular relevance yet except as it applies to the established guidelines. This is the currently accepted guideline for notability, and although it provides a link to the discussion it does not support the proposal. Kafziel Talk 20:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Kafziel, according to the Notability Criteria as set forth in [[3]], there are some alternative test that Dr. Sekhon's current article will meet. According to the Google Test layed out in [[4]], Dr. Sekhon does appear on numerous "distinguishable hits." I can already predict your counter-argument in stating that such test is a proposed test and that there is no consensus on whether this google test is fully supported, I am working with the guidelines spelled out by Wikipedia. Thanks. --Gtorresjr 20:32, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Actually, it's not even a proposed test. It's just an alternative way to check for your own information, and holds no weight in actual deletion discussions. Essentially, the reasoning is that you can buy your way into Google, but you can't buy your way into Wikipedia. See this page for more information about search engine tests. Kafziel Talk 20:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and Luna Santin. --Aaron 20:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks for chiming in Aaron, we missed you! --Gtorresjr 21:02, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Do yourself a favor and go read WP:DICK. --Aaron 21:27, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Who is "we"? According to your contributions, today is your first day on the job. So whose sockpuppet are you? Kafziel Talk 21:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
        • I just find it humorous that all five of you are placing so much emphasis on deleting this one particular article as if it contained false information. I am sure there are plenty of people now posting delete-worthy articles, however your attention is all invested in this one community leader. It is quite disturbing! --Gtorresjr 21:15, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
          • Don't worry - I have plenty of attention to go around. It's just that for some reason when whitebread candidates get nominated for deletion (like Sekhon's former opponent Bill Falzett, who was nominated for deletion today as well), it doesn't take quite so much argument. For some reason, a million meatpuppets don't come out of the woodwork for them. Kafziel Talk 21:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
            • Those that know and understand American Politics (which I am sure is discussed to some extent on this site), should know that once a person loses in his or her party's primary, that such person is no longer in the race and is not part of the General Election. Since Mr. Falzett is no longer in the race, this could be why people are not responding to Kafziel and Vectro's desire to delete Falzett's article. --Gtorresjr 21:53, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Gtorresjr, I would like to point out it takes very little effort to delete an article that is not notable. Even when people create multiple accounts so they can vote more than once, this is easily ignored due to the website's record keeping system. Do not think we are terribly inconvenienced by this article's passing. We still have time to weed out other innapropriate articles. Wikipedia has literally thousands of people watching it, so don't worry too much. HighInBC 21:38, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Are you implying that I voted more than once under different names? Just curious. I am sure you have the ability to run an IP check. --Gtorresjr 21:52, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Heck, you voted more than once under the same name. Kafziel Talk 21:54, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
          • That wasn't my question, champ. --Gtorresjr 21:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • I did not imply anything. What I said should be taken literally, please do not infer anything else. HighInBC 01:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete He sounds like a decent guy, but not yet notable on the basis of information provided. Uucp 22:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete The person in question is just a candidate, not a Congress rep yet. When elected, I think we can resurrect this article. --Ageo020 (Talk • Contribs) 22:33, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep being a congressional candidate from a major party (in which a Democratic primary had to be won in order to get endorsement) and being covered in reliable publications seems to me to establish notability. It should also be noted that Wikipedia:Candidates and elections is a proposed policy--Jersey Devil 23:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Great point Jersey Devil! --Gtorresjr 18:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Might I ask which reliable publications you're referring to? I keep hearing them mentioned, but nobody's naming names or linking links, so it's hard to tell if it's a serious claim or a bluff. Luna Santin 19:43, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep'- per jersey.Bakaman Bakatalk 00:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Thanks for being proactive Bakasuprman! --Gtorresjr 18:50, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
  • QUESTION I found some articles that talk about Dr. Sekhon's campaign, and another one about his previous engagement in protecting religious rights. The article is no longer modifiable in order to include additional sources. What can be done?--Gtorresjr 21:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
    • The article is quite editable. If you have reliable sources to add, then please do so. Vectro 22:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
      • I definitely agree, there -- if you've got reliable sources or any other ways to fix up the article, now's the time. If you make dramatic changes, it may be worth taking a moment to note them here, in this discussion, so that other editors (myself included) can review the changes and see if their opinions are impacted. Good luck. Luna Santin 10:53, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep all articles about major-party candidates for Congress or other offices of that significance. This case is stronger than some others because he won a contested primary. JamesMLane t c 10:21, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Jersey Devil; C&E is not policy or even a guideline and it's not a good proposed guideline either, in my opinion. He's notable. Our only fear should be that candidates would use Wikipedia to promote their campaigns. However, major party Congressional candidates are not garage bands, and that's not why these articles get created. It's of historical interest to see who the major candidates were, regardless of who wins. That yields insight into the policital climate and dynamics of the day. We're not paper, and we can spare 1K for this. I am confident that some people in that region will still find this article of interest in a 100 years, as a small window into the local political past. Fishboy 10:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- he won a contested primary in the district-wide election for Congress. He's certainly notable in _that_ district. And, as per above . . . -- Sholom 17:35, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. We have many articles on candidates who do not currently hold political office. Sekhon is, as has been stated above, a notable candidate in many ways, and Wikipedia should have information on him. Academic Challenger 21:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
  • As is clearly demonstrated by his <600 Google hits...? Luna Santin 08:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Generally I support the Google test, but in this case it is not as important. Academic Challenger 23:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. :) Luna Santin 09:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
  • The problem with Sekhon is that there seem to be multiple spellings of his first name + he sometimes goes by AJ.

I've added some links to newspaper articles about him almost all of which were already online when he got nominated. Oh and here's a fairly good google search. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=Sekhon+herger&sa=N&tab=nw BTW

  • Keep

grazon 05:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep- He has won the June 2006 Democratic primary to gain the nomination to run for a seat in the United States House of Representatives, defeating Bill Falzett. May be a notable fellow.Nileena joseph 15:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)


  • Delete as non-noteable.... for now. If he wins, yes, he should have an article. But if he loses and never does anything else of note then we will never have anything more then a stub. ---J.S (t|c) 20:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Congressional elections are every two years. For historical purposes, it is mportant to have articles of those candidates that run for Congress. Whether a person wins or losses, he or she is still part of the democratic process that we should all take seriously. --69.86.55.138 05:31, 28 October 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.