Talk:Stephen Randall (political scientist)

Notability
I argue that Dr. Stephen Randall is
 * A noted academic
 * A published author
 * A man who has had influence in oil policy, Canadian-American relations, and inter-american relations
 * A public figure in terms of his leadership with several organizations, such as the Rocky Mountain Civil Liberties Association and the Liberal Party of Canada.

He has received significant coverage for his campaign to become Member of Parliament for Calgary Centre-North. Additionally, his career before his political adventure showcases a notable public intellectual that has influenced people, policy, and nations.

AMinionOfTheState (talk) 02:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * None of that coverage has been documented. The only reference in the article refers to him only as a history professor and makes no mention of any of his other accomplishments.
 * He fails WP:POLITICIAN at this point, and I don't see anything that says he's a notable professor or otherwise notable person. However, depending on the nature of the Rocky Mountain Civil Liberties Association, that could be enough—although the absence of an article says the association isn't notable. —C.Fred (talk) 03:12, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Checking the links recently added, one of the sources does contain an assertion of significance under WP:ACADEMIC. "In 2007 he held the Fulbright Visiting Chair in North American Studies at American University, Washington D.C." Holding a named chair makes one a notable academic. This article would at least need to go the AfD route; there's enough of an assertion to forestall a speedy delete. —C.Fred (talk) 03:16, 3 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Fred, I would say that the RMCLA is fairly notable, especially in Alberta. It is regularly highlighted in the news in Canada and is a solid piece of the political framework in Alberta, Canada. Here's a link to their website. http://rmcla.ca/ I agree that this article should not pass any test that he's a politician or a notable politician at that: that's just a side point and I don't want that to dominate the page.


 * Also, I am not familiar with AfD. What is the AfD route? AMinionOfTheState (talk) 05:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, I do agree that this is an edge case rather than an outright deletion — but what it still lacks, for example, is proper reliable sourcing for his work as a political scientist, any noted works he may have published or any explanation of how he's had a prominent influence in "oil policy, Canadian-American relations, and inter-american relations". The only assertion of notability here that's actually supported by reliable, verifiable sources is his election candidacy itself, which isn't a criterion that Wikipedia accepts as sufficient. As an academic affiliated with a major university, it's certainly possible that he is sufficiently notable for inclusion here — but this specific article, as written, doesn't really demonstrate that in a way that meets Wikipedia's inclusion standards. Accordingly, I am going to nominate it for WP:AFD — but I'm fully prepared to withdraw the nomination if the article gets adequate sourcing improvements in the meantime. Bearcat (talk) 19:31, 6 April 2011 (UTC)