Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Stack (2nd nomination)

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. I don't see a "first nomination" anywhere though even though it says 2nd nom. That's no big deal though.Wizardman 23:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Pat Stack

Pat Stack (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I previously nominated Stack along with a number of other individuals, whom I was subsequently convinced were of a varying degree of notability. For this reason, I withdrew my group nomination and agreed to relist the non-notable articles individually. Stack is a functionary in a very small (but notable) political party in the UK. While his party is notable and contains notable persons, this notability does not transafer to Stack. He fails Wikipedia policy for notability for politician which determine that only those politicians "who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures." or are "(m)ajor local political figures who have received significant press coverage" are notable. Smith is neither. This guy's never held elected office and is really only known to cognoscenti of the left fringe. He is also not a noted political philosopher but writes pamphlets for his party and articles in his party's paper. Just about every non-junior member of this small group does this. He is also not a noted union figure nor a noted extra-parliamentary figure. Bigdaddy1981 20:16, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. The article indicates that he has some status, having written an article for Socialist Review for some twenty years. A Google search [1] also indicates some media coverage, though that is mainly by minor political journals or the Socialist Review itself. Anyway, enough for pause for thought and to allow the entry the benefit of the doubt. SilkTork 23:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Although his mum probably enjoyed his articles this man doesn't hold elected office and is an entirely non notable small time activist. Nick mallory 00:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: fails WP:BIO. For someone with alleged prominence in British politics, a search on Google UK turns up precisely 82 unique hits [2], not a single one of them outside fringe socialist websites. In response to SilkTork, the article alleges that he has some status, but there is no evidence backing that assertion up.  RGTraynor  18:52, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 04:26, 5 July 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.