Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott Peters (politician)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Flowerparty☀ 22:46, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Scott Peters (politician)

Scott Peters (politician) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

notability not established, no significant secondary coverage listed, subject may be notable in the future, but wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Napsterbater (talk) 01:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Local politicians have to demonstrate significance above and beyond average locals, and being the first president of whateveritis doesn't suffice. Nyttend (talk) 01:34, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Significant news coverage, both in local and national newsmedia. GoogleNews returns 1440 hits[1] for "Scott Peters" "San Diego". Probably not all are about him, but at least a few hundred are. E.g. LA Times [2], [3], [4][5], SF Chronicle [6], NYT [7], FOX News[8], Washongton Post [9], Christian Science Monitor [10], Philadelphia Inquirer[11], etc, and a ton of coverage in San Diego Union Tribune. Passes WP:BIO. Nsk92 (talk) 05:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, certainly being president of the city council asserts notability. *Soman (talk) 10:12, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
    • It does not, as it is a local council. Even a city mayor requires multiple secondary sourcings from national newspapers to assert, much less satisfy notability. That said, it seems like Nsk92's sources are enough. I will list them then withdraw the nom. Napsterbater (talk) 19:44, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, I would generally consider city councillors in the 8th-largest U.S. city to be notable enough, and he holds the council presidency. --Dhartung | Talk 17:52, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep although most of the mentions are insignificant, some of them are substantial. DGG (talk) 22:10, 21 May 2008 (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.