Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian Wyllie


 * 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) -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  07:45, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Adrian Wyllie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Wyllie is hardly notable enough to warrant a page of his own, and on many different occasions, I have suggested that the page needs to be seriously reworked or redirected to the election page. The same anonymous users have removed these suggestions without any sort of explanation as to why. It seems highly likely that these users are affiliated with his campaign in some form or another, as their only edits have been on Wyllie's page, and on one other. Tqycolumbia (talk) 19:23, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:56, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep As both a Wikipedia editor since 2005, and the subject of this article, I normally wouldn't edit anything directly related to me unless to correct a blatant factual error. However, I believe this AFD submission to be politically motivated, so I feel it's only fair for me to respond.  I suggest that all you need to do to determine notability is to do a Google news search for my name. PlainSight (talk) 03:19, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete It's curious to me that the subject of this article thinks that he can give an unbiased opinion on whether the article about him should be deleted. He suggests that I do a Google news search for his name. However, the only things that really come up are a few articles from The Examiner and news articles that mention his name without providing any elaboration or information about him whatsoever. He has never held public office before, he has been included in a grand total of one poll on one occasion by one pollster, and his entire article is a summary of his activism that mostly sources explicitly libertarian news outlets. He accuses me of being "politically motivated" in my nomination of his article for deletion, but a quick glance at the list of edits on his page shows that users with explicitly libertarian usernames have provided the bulk of the article. I have made thousands of edits on Wikipedia over the last three years, including substantial edits on the vast majority of current state legislators in Florida, and not once have I been accused of bias or any sort of political motivation. My political beliefs are not relevant to this conversation, but I will offer that any time I edit the page of a politician I admire or like, I still include reference to controversy or criticism. It is exceedingly rare for a third party candidate to have a page of their own, and it is even more rare for a third party candidate to have a page of their own when they are not a candidate for president, nor a have they ever been an office holder. In the (unlikely) event that Wyllie becomes a serious contender in the general election, and in the (even unlikelier) event that he wins, I will happily retract my nomination. But for now, I think that this is an acceptable line to draw. Tqycolumbia (talk) 22:48, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * To Tqycolumbia, as AfD submitter, your delete vote is already assumed. -PlainSight (talk) 17:55, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The subject is clearly notable, he has received significant national and regional coverage particularly on the Real Id topic.Jacona (talk) 13:31, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Does it make that much of a difference who has created or made the vast majority of edits on a page? You think a Republican was the first person to give Hillary or Obama their first Wiki entry? That portion of your argument is irrelevant. Wikipedia is full of so many useless entries for useless people, that the only motivation I can find for suggesting that this be deleted is that it must be political. I'm sorry if you think Wikipedia will provide legitimacy for a third party candidate and that your favorite candidate might lose some votes. To JaconaFrere's point, the candidate receives regional and national coverage particular on Real ID. He is mentioned enough on non-libertarian news reports that an article is warranted (I heard of him on NPR). I'd like to add that the candidate was invited to the gubernatorial debates. If the election commission think he's legit enough to debate, then Wikipedia should find him legit enough to include an entry on him. Just admit that your suggestion for deletion is politically motivated so we can move on. Dskirsa (talk) 15:51, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per the significant coverage in this articleWebCite and this articleWebCite from cltampa.com (which is owned by Nashville Scene), as well as this articleWebCite from Key West Citizen and this articleWebCite from WFTS-TV. In order, the articles are titled "Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Adrian Wyllie gets his day in court", " Adrian Wyllie on why you should make him governor", "Libertarian candidate Wyllie weighs in", and "Pinellas Libertarian won't get a driver's license and he won't stop driving". The article should be kept because Adrian Wyllie passes Notability. Cunard (talk) 04:58, 26 June 2014 (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.