Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aftab Pureval


 * 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.  Sandstein  12:27, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Aftab Pureval

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A puffery-filled personal bio of a politician who doesn't meet WP:NPOL. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 02:13, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 02:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. I feel like I've done a decent job of stating facts objectively and without puffery; however, I do concede that I haven't included enough opposing viewpoints, and I'm working to fix that. As for notability, I feel strongly that Pureval meets WP:GNG for significant coverage in reliable sources. Of particular note are the Daily Kos piece, this coverage in AdAge (I haven't yet added his Aftab/Aflac campaign advertising to the article), and the lengthy Cincinnati profile . He has also received significant local coverage beyond what is normally expected for the oft-ignored clerk of courts position -- compare the sources available on Google for "aftab pureval" vs those for his predecessor, "tracy winkler". - Iago Qnsi (talk) 02:42, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clerk of courts at the county level is not a notability criterion that would get a person into Wikipedia under WP:NPOL, but the sourcing here is not making a strong case that he could be considered more notable than the norm. It's an office whose holders would simply be expected to generate some coverage in their county's own local media, so local coverage isn't enough to demonstrate notability by itself — to consider a person at this level of office notable enough for an article, we would require evidence that he was getting nationalized coverage beyond just Cincinnati media alone, thereby making him more notable than most other clerks of courts in most other counties. The fact that he may be more visible within Cincy than his predecessor was isn't the make-or-break condition in and of itself — the determing factor is whether or not his prominence can be shown as significantly wider (i.e. statewide or national) than most other court clerks could claim. But the only evidence of that being shown here is Daily Kos, which is not a notability-supporting source because it's a user-generated activist blog, not a media outlet. Bearcat (talk) 17:52, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Alright, I concede; I made a mistake here. I had read WP:NPOL before writing the article, but I hadn't read WP:POLOUTCOMES, so I didn't realize that meeting WP:GNG isn't sufficient for local politicians if the sources are almost entirely local. Mea culpa. (However, I am gonna hang on to a copy of the article, because I think it's pretty likely that he'll become notable in the future). - Iago Qnsi (talk) 19:18, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete local politicians with this type of office are not in any way default notable and we need non-local coverage to be more than routine.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:23, 21 November 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.