Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Hancock (Canadian politician)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:01, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Hancock (Canadian politician)

Insufficiently notable. -- Curps 02:14, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

OK, the fact that he was a mayor was mentioned only in passing in the middle of the original copyvio resumé/CV and I must have missed it, and Google on a common name like this didn't help. -- Curps 21:38, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep Mayor of a city of 90,000 people. That's notable for me. The article needs a lot of work though. --Lee Hunter 02:34, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong cleanup and keep.--Centauri 03:08, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • It's a copy violation[1]. I don't know if I made a faux pas by listing it for copyvio while it's on VfD, but I'm supposed to be bold. >_> I left the VfD message up as is, and replaced the content with the copyvio. The mayor does deserve an article, though. ?Mar·ka·ci:2005-02-3 03:46 Z
  • Keep iff someone writes a non-copyvio article. The topic is worthwhile. (Otherwise, delete, and let someone else have a go at the redlink.) --TenOfAllTrades 04:51, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • There's a nice fresh non-copyvio piece I just wrote sitting at Mike Hancock (Canadian politician)/Temp. Keep it? Samaritan 05:35, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep! mayors deserve their own articles! Especially mayors if large cities like Brantford. Earl Andrew 05:55, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep the new non-copyvio page -- James Teterenko (talk) 06:39, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep non-copyvio version. And remove copyvio from article history. Mgm|(talk) 10:11, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. James F. (talk) 12:35, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I've deleted the copyvio notice and moved Samaritan's temp page to the main article title. Oh, and my vote is keep; IMO, mayors pass the notability test. Bearcat 21:31, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Spinboy 04:42, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Actually, putting "Mike Hancock mayor Brantford Ontario" into Google gives you several pages of legitimate hits. But I am not convinved this is the point. I have made the point elsewhere that just serving as an elected official in some two-bit town (sorry, Brantford, I'm sure you are all lovely people -- but just 90,000 of you) cannot possibly entitle someone to an encyclopedic entry, or we will end up with millions (yes, millions) of them. Look -- how many Indian towns are there with 90,000+ inhabitants and a mayor. What about Indonesia, Brazil, or the USA? If the time comes that Mr. Hancock achieves some fame or notoriety (e.g. he serves more terms than any other Canadian mayor, he bankrupts Brantford by siphoning off city funds into his car dealership, or whatever) then give him his entry. But not just for being a mayor (and for only two years so far). Delete HowardB 06:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Actually no, you wouldn't wind up with millions of articles. If the planet had one million cities with more than 90,000 people the population of the earth would be 90 billion.--Lee Hunter 12:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Actually, quite possibly. Note I said "elected officials". People are putting in aldermen, councillors, etc. Living, and dead. So let's go back over the last 100 years or so -- many officials only serve one term -- say 4 years or so? I don't what to get pedantic about this, but the point is, there will just be too many. HowardB 13:59, 8 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.