- 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 delete. Black Kite (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
- Stavros Anthony ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Local elected politician with no other evident claims to notability. Marquardtika ( talk) 21:30, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. (I had previously applied for speedy A7 but was declined). Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 04:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 11:20, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Las Vegas is a large and prominent enough city that a city councillor would be accepted as notable if the article were substanced and sourced well enough to satisfy WP:NPOL #2 — but serving on a city council is not an automatic inclusion freebie that entitles a person to keep an article that's based solely on two primary sources and one glancing namecheck of his existence in an article about somebody else. Bearcat ( talk) 04:13, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- Weak keep: Again, we cannot conflate article quality and notability. If a Las Vegas city councillor would normally be accepted as notable, then he's notable. The article might be weak, but it has a few sources. With the proviso of the above "normally accepted as notable" status, this article is in need of improvement and expansion, but not deletion. Montanabw (talk) 06:16, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- No, city councillors would not be "normally" accepted as notable — they're accepted as notable if, and only if, they are sourced well enough to satisfy WP:NPOL #2. Not "might someday become sourced enough", but "already are sourced enough in the here and now". Las Vegas is not a city where the councillors get an automatic inclusion freebie just for existing; it's a city where they're accepted as notable if they're sourced well enough to pass NPOL #2, and not if they aren't. Bearcat ( talk) 06:27, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Fails NPOLITICIAN. If he's done something beyond the city councillor level, then I'd be fine with the article returning. But as stated above, municipal level politicians are not notable according to Wikipedia's standards just for being politicians at that level. South Nashua ( talk) 16:19, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 16:00, 23 October 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.