- 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. ( non-admin closure) Lourdes 09:22, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- LaToya Cantrell ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
obvious campaign advertisement by obvious coi editor DGG ( talk ) 02:37, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 02:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 02:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman ( talk) 02:39, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I accepted this draft after noticing this conversation. Normally I'm the one nominating articles for deletion and arguing that the bar for GNG isn't that low. I'm gobsmacked that after considering the subject and accepting, the guy who fought so hard to protect NN schools in Korea now thinks this article is worthy of deletion. I make no comment about the original editor and their purposes ahead of a municipal election. The subject fails NPOL but I felt they passed GNG. The coverage is local and perhaps a little ROUTINE but I've seen editors fight to the bitter end for less. Chris Troutman ( talk) 02:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Plenty of coverage. Rhadow ( talk) 10:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. While the article certainly needs some cleanup for neutrality, New Orleans is a large and major and famous enough city that city councillors are accepted as notable under WP:NPOL #2 as long as they can be properly sourced as the subject of significant media coverage. And the sources here are properly demonstrating that — they aren't all great, but enough of them are good. We don't routinely accept all city councillors as notable, no, but we do accept some city councillors as notable if they meet one or both of two conditions: (a) they serve on the councils of major metropolitan global cities, and (b) although outside of that range of cities, they can still be especially well-sourced as significantly more notable than the norm. Yes, the article needs some attention, but that's a matter for the editing process rather than the deletion process. Bearcat ( talk) 17:35, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Comments/ I am much more concerned about promotionalism than I am about notability . Small variations in our notability standard to not much affect the encyclopedia one way or another; accepting anything resembling advertising destroys its value; If people want advertising , Google does it better. She's running for the city council in New Orleans. So far we've considered that a major political position only in NYC and Chicago. The article was written by NOLAFiddler, an obviously promotional user name: The City Council in New Orleans foes by the acronym NOLA. The contents of the article is praise for her work after Katrina, and other city projects--routine work for any politician.--look at the details, most of them are utterly trivial. The references are mostly where she takes c=personal credit t=for everything she voted for. DGG ( talk ) 21:04, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- So far we've considered that a major political position only in NYC and Chicago...and Atlanta and Seattle and Washington DC and Los Angeles and San Francisco and San Diego and Boston and Detroit and Minneapolis and Philadelphia, and sometimes in New Orleans too (as witness the fact that
Category:New Orleans City Council members is quite far from empty).
Bearcat (
talk)
21:20, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- no , its rather that some have gone on to higher offices.But promotionalism is in any case more improttant.
DGG (
talk )
00:24, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- No, it's not just that some have gone on to higher offices; while it's true that some have, the notability standard for city councillors is as I described and not just "New York and Chicago and nowhere else". And again, promotionalism can be fixed through the editing process — if the base notability claim and sourceability meet our standards, which they do, then the promotionalism issue is dealt with by fixing the article tone and not by deleting the article outright. Bearcat ( talk) 01:53, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- no , its rather that some have gone on to higher offices.But promotionalism is in any case more improttant.
DGG (
talk )
00:24, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
- So far we've considered that a major political position only in NYC and Chicago...and Atlanta and Seattle and Washington DC and Los Angeles and San Francisco and San Diego and Boston and Detroit and Minneapolis and Philadelphia, and sometimes in New Orleans too (as witness the fact that
Category:New Orleans City Council members is quite far from empty).
Bearcat (
talk)
21:20, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
- Keep per the well-reasoned rationale provided above by Bearcat. North America 1000 16:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I cleaned up the article some but it still needs work. I also added a lifetime achievement award, with a reliable source, given to the subject in 2016 by four university presidents. Based on sustained news coverage, the subject and article meet WP:GNG. AuthorAuthor ( talk) 10:48, 1 August 2017 (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.