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.
Non-notable local politician. Google search shows no notability and basically unknown outside of his own county. Does not meet
WP:NPOL. Article seems to have been created as the subject is running for office, which is not notable in itself. Also suspiciously
WP:COI.
Serhatserhatserhat (
talk)
22:34, 17 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete - Aside from the fact that the content is so obviously and overtly promotional, the subject does not meet
WP:GNG or
WP:NPOL. On the latter, the subject has never held national or similar office (only very recently being elected to a local council). On the former, the only coverage of the subject is the run-of-the-mill coverage about his candidacy in the pending general election. The only material coverage is the relatively limited coverage that is already linked in the article. (Much of which, frankly, appears to have been copy/pasted into Wikipedia without consideration to
WP:COPYVIO or
WP:CLOP guidelines. To the extent that, in honesty, this could likely have been speedy deleted under
WP:G11 (as unambiguous promotion) or
WP:G12 (as clear copyvio of the few local news pieces upon which it is based).)
Guliolopez (
talk)
23:42, 17 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Update - While I found it very odd that a new editor would give a barnstar/wikilove to an editor (with whom they had absolutely no overlap and who has been inactive on the project for a decade), I hadn't referred to the author's odd editing patterns or COI concerns (raised by the nominator) in my note above. That the author has since
expressed a connection to the subject seems relevant to this thread. Certainly it has cemented my own concerns and recommendation. Which remains a firm "delete".
Guliolopez (
talk)
01:02, 18 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. Nothing against the subject, just to be clear, but serving on a county council is not in and of itself grounds for a Wikipedia article — in Ireland, unfortunately, the only politicians who get a guaranteed pass of
WP:NPOL just for the fact of holding political office are actual Teachtaí Dála. For politicians at the local level of office, including county councillors, the notability test is not just the ability to verify that he exists, but the ability to write a really substantial article that
reliably sources some genuine context for his political importance, e.g. by demonstrating that he has much more nationalized significance than the norm for county councillors. But the county council's own self-published website about itself, a piece of raw technical verification of election results and a tiny smattering of purely local campaign coverage in the local media is not enough sourcing to do that.
Bearcat (
talk)
01:59, 18 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete - I would say clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN (and the WP position on county councillors in Ireland, who have very little real power, is well established) and also WP:GNG. I cannot comment without study on the inter-editor or CoI aspects, but I think we have a clear case of promo risk, especially in an election period. Basic searches do not suggest any easy improvement potential in the situation.
SeoR (
talk)
13:42, 21 January 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete Wexford County Councillor. County councilmembers are not afforded the presumption of notability under
WP:NPOL. Bearcat says it best about when a local elected official is able to demonstrate an article is appropriate. --
Enos733 (
talk)
18:53, 21 January 2020 (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.