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.
John254 02:01, 21 December 2007 (UTC)reply
An auditor, defeated in a bid for his party's nomination. Guy (
Help!) 21:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)reply
An auditor, defeated in a bid for his party's nomination. Which is grounds for an article to be kept around!!! Did you just submit this for fun? William Anderson (
User:Wanderson9) 23:18, 16 December 2007 (GMT) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.227.165.25 (
talk)
Keep. It could do with in-line citations but otherwise it appears to meet WP:V and WP:N.
Billscottbob (
talk) 04:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)reply
KeepAllison Kolb wasthe State Auditor an elected statewide official at the time
1(even today the Louisiana Legislative Auditor who is appointed by the Legislature Is very powerful)--
Looktothis (
talk) 15:41, 17 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Delete Disproportionate coverage, of no concern to a general encyclopedia. we need a Louisiana Wikia for material like this. mention in one book, and the rest are primary sources and an uncritical obit. DGG (
talk) 07:48, 19 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong Keep Per
WP:BIO, statewide elected officials are granted a presumption of inherent notabilty ("Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature"). the ample reliable and verifiable sources provided here clearly satisfy the
Wikipedia:Notability standard. It completely strains credulity to claim that this article fails
WP:BIO, and that an admin would be ignorant of this clear claim of notability only adds to the damage.
Alansohn (
talk) 20:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)reply
Keep. In all honesty, it shows a pretty low understanding of the notability guidelines presenting this article for deletion (sorry Guy if this may sound harsh, but I think you botched this one badly).--
Aldux (
talk) 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)reply
I think Guy made an honest mistake, too, but I appreciate how hard he has tried to work with Billy on these articles, so I'd hardly say Guy "botched" it. I know Billy looked at a lot of sources when he was writing his thesis and I wish he'd just cite them in all these articles that keep going to AfD. Sources don't have to be available on line -- old newspaper clippings work, too. There are more of Billy's articles I'd like to keep but we really can't work just on his say-so, any more than Wikipedia can accept mine or yours. --A. B.(talk) 18:48, 20 December 2007 (UTC)reply
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.