Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Hayes

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. W.marsh 19:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gary Hayes

Gary Hayes (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Contested speedy and prod. Non notable local politician, nothing offered that meets WP:BIO. Nuttah68 07:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Nuttah68 07:34, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, falls well short of notability criteria. --Dhartung | Talk 08:28, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom: nothing suggests notability. --Goochelaar 14:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Not even close to meeting WP:Notable. His last "harrah" indeed. Accounting4Taste 14:46, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

This article has already underwent deletion consideration. I request that this deletion notice be removed because this seems like WP:GAME. Sgt. bender 20:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment Unfortunately, a comment like "I just think it adds a little flavor to the local area. We barely get any internet coverage at all. This way, someone can go online and check out their politicians." by Sgt. bender, the originator and main contributor to this article (see [1]), seems to confirm that the subject is not covered elsewhere and so non notable. --Goochelaar 20:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

This article on Gary Hayes should be left. Considering that a video on YouTube featuring Mr. Hayes was viewed over 500 times in one day, was commented on 25 times, and received two YouTube "honors" shows that he is noteworthy enough to garner at least some attention on a national forum. Let the article stay. Dr.orfannkyl —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:01, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment Note that Dr.orfannkyl's only contribution to Wikipedia has been the comment on this AfD. Accounting4Taste 17:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I never found anything that I felt so strongly about, I guess. And anyway, I just created an account so I haven't had time to do much. Dr.orfannkyl 20:34, 10 October 2007

Don't get me wrong -- I'll be the first to welcome you to Wikipedia and, after I post this, I'm going to go and leave you a "welcome" message with some useful links and offer my further help with anything you need; I hope you stay around as an editor. But it's extremely unusual for someone's first contribution to Wikipedia to be a comment on an article for deletion... some people use what's called a "single purpose account" (SPA) to add credence to a Wikipedia situation that they're trying to influence, and that's one of the hallmarks of a SPA. I wanted people to consider that possibility, that's all, since it might give weight to an administrator one way or the other. I still have no opinion about your account, and it will stay that way. Accounting4Taste 00:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Keep the material at least until after the election. I searched for 'county elections' for precedents, and found Maryland county offices elections, 2006 and Maryland county executive elections, 2006, along with George F. Johnson, IV, one of the candidates. Perhaps something like New York 2008 county elections could be created, and then the candidates could either have their own articles or be incorporated into the election article. I think that would solve the 'notability' issue. For now, I'll wikify Schoharie County, New York in the article just so it's put in context. Flatterworld 02:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

It has certainly not been Wikipedia policy in practice to declare that "national coverage" is necessary for politicians to be notable enough for an article; virtually no state senators, representatives, mayors (and even certainly some members of Congress and Governors!) would not meet that criteria. If the individual in question is notable in the local area and has received significant news coverage there, he would be worthy of an article. I believe, rather than deletion, a "notability" tag on the article is warranted to get some of these news articles into the article as references (keep in mind that news sources do not have to be online to be included as references).--Gloriamarie 17:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Loaded with unsourced material and OR Toddstreat1 17:38, 13 October 2007 (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.