Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Cardenas

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 no consensus. The article defaults to "keep." Joyous 16:10, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] George Cardenas

This individual receives 301 hits on google. [1] Does being an alderman make one "notable enough" for Wikipedia? Is there an existing precedent? GRider\^talk 19:10, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Chicago is a big place and not everyone in it is notable. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:26, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Enh, neutral. We kept an alderman recently, mostly on the grounds that all Chicago aldermen are notable despite being local politicians if I recall correctly. I can't find that article now; it's none of the ones listed in Chicago aldermen or Category:Chicago Alderman. Though, of those, only Eugene Schulter and Thomas Tunney have any more content than George Cardenas does, and a few have even less. Maybe merge them all. —Korath (Talk) 06:42, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Chicago has an awful lot of aldermen, but I think we should say that members of aldermanic boards, city councils, etc, of any large city are inherently notable. Otherwise, we could have an awful lot of unnecessary VfD fights. It's hard to imagine a Chicago alderman (past or present) whom you coudn't write about encyclopedically. The fact that this may currently fall short is an argument for expansion, not deletion. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:38, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Inherently notable.--Centauri 01:38, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I agree with Jmabel, but shouldn't we merge them into lists then? Radiant! 08:51, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
• I think the article Korath is referring to is Bernie Hansen (an article that GRider, incidentally, referred to as "noteworthy and encyclopedic"). Word is that he was a particularly notable alderman, and held some higher positions too. This article, however, says nothing, and while Chicago Aldermen are important to Chicago, they remain local politicians who do no thave the notability of mayor. Hansen, it seems, was an exception, and several people who voted to keep that article admitted they did so not because he was an alderman. Delete this one. -R. fiend 09:58, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Jesus Christ! I just looked at the Chicago aldermen page and we have a list of 50 people who are all on their way to having substubs reading "X is a Chicago alderman". I think turning them all into redirects is a no-brainer here, as they currently give no information that isn't included by having their names on the list. The problem with that is deciding what to do after they are no longer aldermen. Anyway, I'll probably go ahead and do that after this VfD is over, unless its decided that they should be deleted. -R. fiend 17:07, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Vagrant 20:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, just under the bar of notability for me. Megan1967 06:43, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. ComCat 02:07, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep -- It may grow into something more fruitful. Longhair 18:12, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Chicago aldermen. See also Wikipedia:Deletion_policy/Local_politicians. Android79 00:52, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, spurious notability. JamesBurns 10:57, 26 Feb 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.