Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sue Schilling (2nd nomination)

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 Delete. Walton Need some help? 16:29, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sue Schilling

Sue Schilling (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Local politicians are still not notable. No significant press coverage found. Two hits from the local paper do not rise to the level of notability expected here. No improvement to this article has been made since August 2006. DarkAudit 14:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete: Fails WP:BIO as local county official.  RGTraynor  14:53, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Multiple, non-trivial reliable and verifiable sources are provided to establish notability under the WP:BIO guideline, the only relevant Wikipedia policy that addresses such articles. Alansohn 19:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Ummm ... if you're citing WP:BIO, here are the clauses directly referencing politicians: (a) Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures; (b) Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage; and (c) Just being an elected local official does not guarantee notability. Which of (a) or (b) are you claiming she fulfills?  RGTraynor  23:10, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. A strikingly similar article on a fellow Atlantic County freeholder was just deleted. This article at least includes a mention in what appears to be a statewide political blog, but it doesn't exactly meet the "news feature" required of WP:BIO. Otherwise, she doesn't seem notable outside her local area. -- NORTH talk 22:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC) !Vote withdrawn. -- NORTH talk 22:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
  • J'accuse WP:CANVAS says: "A hard and fast rule does not exist with regard to selectively notifying certain editors who have or are thought to have a predetermined point of view on their talk pages in order to influence a vote. However, the greater the number of editors contacted, the more often this behavior is engaged in, and the greater the resulting disruption, the more likely it is that this behavior will result in warnings and/or sanctions. Some Wikipedians have suggested that informing editors on all "sides" of a debate (e.g., everyone who voted in a previous AfD on a given subject) may be acceptable.

The Arbitration Committee has ruled that "[t]he occasional light use of cross-posting to talk pages is part of Wikipedia's common practice. However, excessive cross-posting goes against current Wikipedia community norms. In a broader context, it is unwiki. "1. Wikipedia editors are therefore not to engage in aggressive cross-posting in order to influence votes, discussions, requests for adminship, requests for comment, etc." Talking to two people who have already taken part in this current round of discussion hardly meets the definition of 'excessive'. DarkAudit 04:15, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

    • Note to note The record will show that this 'solicitation' consisted of contacting all of two (2) editors who were already active participants in these discussions. As the relevant portion of WP:CANVAS shows (quoted above), the Arbitration Committee sees contacting only two people as 'common practice'. I have agreed to refrain from contacting anyone else regarding these AfDs, but have still been accused of acting in bad faith. DarkAudit 04:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete NN local politician per WP:BIO. ccwaters 14:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No claim to notability save for being a politician at the county level. Precedent has shown election to state legislature to confer insufficient notability for inclusion on its own, so serving at the county level definitely should not. With nothing else there to merit an article... Caknuck 07:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete by nom and Caknuck. Not even close to meeting WP:BIO, no matter how much mud Alansohn tries to stir up to obscure this. --Calton | Talk 08:19, 1 May 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.