Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Freda (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 keep. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 23:27, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Freda

Tom Freda (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Previously nominated and kept without a lot of discussion, this article still doesn't demonstrate any independent notability for Freda. Very few sources are about Freda himself rather than merely quoting the fact that he's leader of this organisation (which, incidentally, doesn't appear massively notable itself; I was surprised to only find 95 unique GHits, and most of those mirrors or blogs). I boldly redirected the article to the organization's, and was reverted, so bringing here. Black Kite 07:56, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

First of all, I came up with a lot more Google results with your search terms. Re; hits, republicanism is only a hot item whenever the royal family has a scandal or there's a royal visit. So if you're nominating this for deletion because of Google hits, it's just plain wrong. Re; independent notability, what is it you're looking for? The organization is internationally recognized as Canada's republican movement. Freda is a founder, director and spokesperson for a national organization. When republicanism comes up in the news, he's on all the major TV news networks and radio talk shows (where I first heard of him). If that's not notable, then what is? Check for yourself. http://www.canadian-republic.ca/media_exposure.html And I don't get why this has come up again. From what I've seen, this was settled before with only a couple of people voting for deletion. MC Rufus (talk) 08:27, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'm not entirely sure what the story is here, but I just checked the deletion guidelines and this entry meets or exceeds notability. Also, it says this: "Avoid criteria based on search engine statistics (e.g., Google hits or Alexa ranking)." Please explain. MC Rufus (talk) 08:39, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Your search is the same as mine. Go down the bottom of the page and click on the "10" which takes you to page 10 of the search. You will see that there are only 95 unique GHits, regardless of what Google tells you on the first page. However this isn't really the point; I am aware of the Google criteria, but this isn't an AfD for the CCR; I am merely pointing out that it isn't a major organization. The real problem here, as the nomination says, is the lack of independent sources of the notability of Freda. There may be some available; if so, and they can be added, then that's fine. Black Kite 11:12, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, so the Google hits as a reason for deletion are out. For independent sources what more could you need than the National Post and CTV external links? Both were national exposure and acknowledge his notability. Are these not good enough? Look, I'm committed to providing accurate and credible material and I have asked for it (and photos) from CCR. I expect it soon. I don't want to go to all this trouble and then have it end up deleted.MC Rufus (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to Citizens for a Canadian Republic (which I have tagged with {{primary sources}}, although Google News tells me some may exist). Insufficient independent notability. --Dhartung | Talk 09:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep surely being the leader of an organization that opposes its government system, is notable. GoodDay (talk) 13:55, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Surely it takes more than just opposing your government system? --Dhartung | Talk 18:03, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

In the old days, Freda's politics may have been considered treasonist. He's is calling for a Republic. GoodDay (talk) 18:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

True, on Newsworld last Victoria Day, he said he and other CCR members have had death threats. re above comment, I took it mean that he is notable because he is "successfully" oposing the government. Republicanism is in the news a lot lately and it's always Freda or some other CCR person arguing the republican side.Jaye Peghtyff (talk) 20:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Keep reasons noted above. And although I just noticed he already has a bio on the CCR website, this page is deserving because of the significance of the CCR and his notability as a nationally recognized voice of the republican movement.MC Rufus (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect as per Dhartung. Freda has some notability, but there doesn't seem to be enough useful information to warrant his own article, especially when one exists for the only thing that makes him notable. --G2bambino (talk) 19:04, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep NC Rufus has improved this page considerably and says there is more to come. As it is, there is more than enough natability to warrant keeping it. That would be obvious to anyone who takes the time to view the video and news item alone. Jaye Peghtyff (talk) 20:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
• Keep and expand. Lede should have a solid statement of why the organization is notable. Otherwise seems like a great start. I would also add some refs to show him being interviewed by RS and a bio infobox. Expect more vandalism from opposition likely only to be twarted with more refs. Benjiboi 07:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
  • comment. I added infobox, please correct any errors and fill in stuff i may have missed. Benjiboi 22:06, 8 February 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.