Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Aikman

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. dbenbenn | talk 16:47, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Aikman

Non-notable political candidate. RickK 08:43, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, but with reservations. Article needs cleanup and expansion. Megan1967 09:28, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Another canned response by Megan. What makes this person notable? What expansion would you like to see? RickK 09:30, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
    • I don't know about Megan1967, but I'd like to see evidence of the "astronomical research" and some indication of actual achievements, publications, discoveries, inventions, and whatnot. (This appears to be the Chris Aikman who is jointly responsible for some of the confirmatory observations for the IAU Minor Planet Center, who was a professional astronomer from 1968 to 1997, and who researched chemically peculiar stars, for example.) At the moment the article reads as if this person were nothing more than a chronic committee membership addict and Public Relations bunny. Less posturing for political office and more biography of scientist, please. Vote reserved for now until average professor test is applied. Uncle G 11:41, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)
• Delete unless evidence of good publication record. Average Earthman 12:33, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If nothing else, the information mentioned by Uncle G above says to me this guy more than meets the notability threshold (and I would say that any person who manages to appear on an official ballot for a major public office has done that anyway). So, yeah, the article needs improvement (and the suggestions made are good ones). If we deleted every article in this condition not much would be left. Jgm 15:20, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • If you'll check up higher in the VfD pages, you'll see that there are several British Columbia provincial legislature candidates who are listed. Being a minor party candidate for a state, provincial or other local election is not notable. It isn't clear from this article if he's running for the BC or the Canadian federal Parliament, though. RickK 20:56, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Spam by the Greens? There's alot of these articles popping up. I think there's a wiki voters guide out there, which is a much better place for these articles. Transwiki. If he's notable as a scientist let someone else write an article about him that establishes that. This influx of articles on politicans has we worried about what wikipedia is becoming. -R. fiend 15:59, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep present version of article (all about science) - David Gerard 23:22, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Current article establishes notability. If he was elected, that would obviously establish political notability. Capitalistroadster 06:36, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete a fine scientist, but not much evidence that he's really outstanding in his field. CDC (talk) 01:46, 21 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.