Talk:Saul Anuzis

Untitled
Ron Paul and Rudy "got into an argument?" I thought Ron answered the question that was asked by the moderator and Rudy responded out of turn.

Why does this article exist?
Why would a chairperson of a state's party have a Wiki entry if they've done nothing of note-- besides the Ron Paul incident, that is....? A quick look around finds that other non-notable state chairpersons do not have Wikipedia articles. This article is filled with personal information rather than professional achievements that would merit a Wikipedia entry.--Gloriamarie 15:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Apparently you looked too quick. You appear have something personal against this article. It has been expanded with personal info, which most articles have, and professional achievements you apparently missed. There are many articles less notable than these people. State chairs are just as notable in the state as national chairs are notable in the nation. Jjmillerhistorian 18:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * You mean like these non-notable state chairs? (Republicans and Democrats)
 * Ron Carey
 * Dick Wadhams
 * Alec Poitevint
 * Andrew McKenna
 * Kris Kobach
 * Robert T. Bennett
 * Katon Dawson
 * Joe Turnham
 * Jake Metcalfe
 * Arthur Torres
 * Karen Thurman
 * Michael Madigan
 * Lawrence Gates
 * Joseph Cryan
 * Jerry Meek
 * Chris Redfern
 * Joe Wineke
 * Please do not imply that I have "something personal against the article." The article is unsourced, is not written in an encyclopedic tone and contains nothing that as of now would make this person notable for a Wikipedia entry.  I simply made a request on the talk page so that someone could come along and establish notability.  Feel free to do so if you can-- that is why the notability tag is inserted.  I do not think simply being the chair of a party in a state makes you inherently notable under Wikipedia guidelines.  Looking at most of the articles above, some are only a few sentences long, some are actually only one sentence long, containing nothing beyond the person's name and their position as chairman/chairwoman.  Some are longer but contain nothing establishing notability.  All are almost completely unsourced and not written in an encyclopedic tone.  They are not good articles.  I'm inclined to say they should all go with the exception of Michael Madigan, who is a well-known politician in Illinois, and Joseph Cryan and Chris Redfern, who are elected general assembly members.  Many of the articles appear to be perhaps be written by the members themselves.  Robert T. Bennett seems to have had many accomplishments as party chairman, accomplishments which these other articles do not include if their subjects have had similar accomplishments. Arthur Torres' article even goes to the level of detail that he attended a rally in October 2006 on a college campus.  Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a biography site-- see WP:NOT.  I'll put notability tags on the ones that do not show it.  Also, the argument "there are many article less notable than these people" does not hold weight according to the Pokémon test-- inclusion should be based on the individual article's merit alone.--Gloriamarie 00:36, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I removed the unconstitutional header. Wikipedia is meant to be unbiased. I'm a Ron Paul supporter, btw. --James1906

I took off the notability tag-- Anuzis does seem to be notable due to many third party news stories about him. The article could definitely be fleshed out with his ideas, etc.--Gloriamarie 04:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC)


 * The other state chairs don't need to go, but they could be expanded. If they can't be expanded then they should probably be merged with their party's page.  I tried to create and expand former state chairs, but I couldn't find enough info to create a decent article.  I figured you'd defend Madigan (since you're from Illinois), and I think he has every right to have an article just as any state chair, just as I was saying before the state chairs are just as notable in the state as national chairs are to the nation.  Of course, with your point, are they notable enough to create an article?  I'm sure they must have some notoriety to become a state chair.  Of course the information would mostly be in the state they represent, which I think should be gathered before creating a tiny one sentence articles. Jjmillerhistorian 16:21, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Anuzis became notable once major news networks such as Fox News began to mention his name. Speaking of Fox News, several of their shows (such as Brit Hume) covered his attempt to ban Paul and later retraction of the attempt. That would be a good secondary source to add to this article. GarryKosmos 07:12, 22 May 2007 (UTC)