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 no consensus. – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 04:01, 31 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Paul Chabot (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Minor government official with good military career. Doesn't seems to meet the criteria for WP:BIO or WP:POLITICIAN. Minor coverage in media. scope_creep ( talk 02:46, 9 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —  JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 02:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. —  JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 02:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Fails WP:BIO and WP:POLITICIAN; little coverage in reliable sources except for brief mentions. Magnolia677 ( talk) 14:58, 9 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete very little sources BnS ( talk) 16:34, 9 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep There are a handful of reliable sources that cover Chabot, here are some examples: LA Times1, LA Times2, National Journal. Fraulein451 ( talk) 1:42, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

• Comment - This is certainly an interesting and accomplished person, but from a strictly Wikipedia point of view, after reading both these reliable sources, I believe the article also fails WP:GNG. Chabot is mentioned in both articles suggested by Fraulein451, in discussions highlighting the backgrounds and platforms of various political candidates (in an election where he was not successful). While not "trivial" mention, the discussion seems routine and resume-like in nature. Magnolia677 ( talk) 10:53, 10 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 14:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 14:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep - he held a statewide appointive office (one of 17 commissioners of the California State Parole Board) which does not automatically confer notability, but led to some coverage in the press: the parole commissioners were attacked for receiving $108,000 a year to meet once a month, but see this letter by Chabot which the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin (2011) chose to print in full, and where he describes the reality of the job. The same issue came up during the 2014 election campaign, see Democrats attack congressional candidate Paul Chabot in TV ad and DECISION 2014: Chabot demands TV ad be taken off the air in The Press-Enterprise. See also this and this, both in the San Bernardino County Sun (2014). This exceeds normal routine coverage of (eventually unelected) candidates. There was also, before the election, Political commentary from the LA Times (2011); Paul Chabot, Former White House Drug Advisor: 'I Don't Have A Lot Of Faith' In Obama Drug Policy in The Huffington Post (2012); Paul Chabot, Former Drug Czar Advisor, Compares Marijuana To Child Pornography and Paul Chabot, Former White House Drug Czar Advisor: 'Trickery' Led To Colorado Legalizing Marijuana, both in The Huffington Post (2013). Plus his tenure in the White House. It all adds up. He passes WP:GNG. Kraxler ( talk) 17:45, 15 August 2015 (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.