Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aftab Pureval (2nd nomination)


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 14:31, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Aftab Pureval
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Politicians are not given an automatic free pass over WP:BIO just because they exist — their ability to qualify for Wikipedia articles is determined by criteria at WP:POLITICIAN.. this one clearly fails there because apparently the politician never elected to any state or national level parliament.. nor received in-depth coverage to pass GNG. Saqib (talk) 18:16, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note I am surprised to find out this is not the first AfD. The article was deleted last year via AfD but I am not sure it CSD's G4 apply ? --Saqib (talk) 18:18, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  We Are All  Here   talk  18:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions.  We Are All  Here   talk  18:50, 11 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Puravel is an elected official with 800,000 constituents, which I believe qualifies him for an article by WP:POLITICIAN by the same virtues that qualify Mayor Jeff Williams (politician) (who is the Mayor of a city smaller than Puravel's constituency), former Mayor James W. Huston (who was the Mayor of Boise, Idaho for two years at a time when the entire state's population was only about 15,000 and accomplished nothing of note), or Minneapolis Ward 12 City Councilman Andrew Johnson (who is a member of city council with only about 30,000 constituents who has accomplished nothing of note). Even Chris Seelbach, a member of Cincinnati City Council, has an article despite having achieved nothing of note, and the city for which he is one of nice councilmembers is contained with the county that Pureval represents. WP:POLITICIAN establishes that American county officials should be held to the same standards as municipal officials. By this standard, Pureval clearly stands up on these merits alone. However, to satisfy this dispute, I have added some significant and nationally notable events to the page. He and his various political endeavors have received significant coverage. --Avidohioan (talk) 19:53, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia's notability criteria for politicians are not determined by the number of people who happen to live in the jurisdiction that the person happens to serve, but by the level of government at which the person serves. A county clerk of courts is not handed an automatic notability freebie just because the county happens to be larger than the population of a city whose mayor has an article or a municipal council ward whose councillor has one, because it's not an equivalent role. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument in an AFD discussion, because sometimes that other stuff needs to be deleted too, and other times it's not actually equivalent for reasons the arguer isn't taking into account — specifically, mayors just have to be directly elected in cities of at least regional prominence, and city councillors have to serve in internationally prominent global cities — but for a county clerk, the only path into Wikipedia is to get over WP:GNG on the strength of nationalized coverage, expanding well beyond the purely local coverage that any county officer in any county could simply expect to routinely receive. A person also does not qualify for an article just for being an as yet unelected candidate in a future Congressional election, either — if you cannot demonstrate that he was already notable enough for a Wikipedia article for some other reason besides the candidacy, then he has to win the Congressional election and thereby hold a seat in the House of Representatives, not just be a candidate, to collect notability on that basis. So no prejudice against recreation in November if he wins the Congressional seat, but nothing here, neither the sourcing nor the substance, is enough to already get him an article today. If you want to write about not yet elected candidates in the 2018 midterms, then go to Ballotpedia — helping aspiring Congresspeople publicize their campaigns is not Wikipedia's role, and it is not going to become Wikipedia's role. Bearcat (talk) 21:52, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete the clerk of a county's court is just plain not notable, no matter how large the county is.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:54, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete see immediate above.Roseohioresident (talk) 02:03, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete the only plausible case for inclusion is that he is a high-profile candidate for Congress who might meet GNG through coverage beyond the normal coverage of a candidate; the Hamilton County Clerk of Courts is clearly not a notable position. I don't see sufficient coverage outside of Cincinnati or politics sites for this to meet GNG. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 02:49, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I think he is likely to meet WP:GNG as a high-profile candidate in the very near future (which is why I have been maintaining a draft at User:IagoQnsi/sandbox/Aftab Pureval since the previous AfD). However, right now it is simply too soon. He has gotten a decent amount of coverage from reliable sources, but most of that coverage is not significant enough. Delete, but with the expectation that he may become more notable in the near future (i.e. so a recreation of this article might not be a WP:G4 speedy deletion candidate). – Iago Qnsi (User talk:IagoQnsi) 02:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Just be aware that if you're continuing to try to make him notable just for being a candidate, rather than having to wait until he wins the seat before he's notable enough, then the bar you'll have to clear to make the article not speediable is extremely high. Like, Christine O'Donnell "got so internationally famous for not being a witch that eight years later I can still name her right off the top of my head faster than I can name the actual senator she lost to, because I'm Canadian and she was getting covered in our media up here" high. Bearcat (talk) 04:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Right, I figure it's pretty unlikely he meets GNG before the election, but that's only like half a year away; I figured that was soon enough to be worth noting. – Iago Qnsi (User talk:IagoQnsi) 21:37, 19 April 2018 (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.