Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Owen-Taylor (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   no consensus. It is 8-2 in favor of deletion if I have done a vote count, but Tomwsulcer sources on the subject on whether she meets WP:GNG wasn't properly countered, which made most of the delete arguments moot. Secret account 00:59, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Angela Owen-Taylor
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Search of subject's name in Google News turns up only three hits, all of them including only passing mentions of this person. I found no wider indication of notability elsewhere (the "enough sources" mentioned in the previous deletion nomination include a moment when she recognized someone else for getting into the Commonwealth Games, a comment she made on the need for a park upgrade, and a time when she got her car broken into-- none of which is about her or discusses her in any depth). Article therefore appears to fail the requirements of WP:GNG on these grounds. KDS 4444 Talk  11:50, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment, specific case aside, judging notability on the sole basis of Google News currently lacks sense, especially since January, when Google stopped its news archives service. Actually GNews only reports news of the last month or so. --Cavarrone  12:37, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Minor political figure at the local level.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd consider Brisbane to be large and internationally famous enough that its municipal councillors could qualify in principle for substantive and well-sourced articles, but this is neither of those things. And indeed, Cavarrone is correct that notability cannot be judged solely by Google News hits alone, as Google News aggregates only a few weeks worth of coverage and fails to locate coverage extending further back than that — so GN is a good tool for verifying the accuracy of a fresh claim of notability (e.g. a new article about a politician who just won an election that took place last week), but is not an infallible gauge for the notability of a politician who's been in office since 2008. So no prejudice against future recreation if somebody can create a good and properly sourced new version of an article about her, but this version as written is a delete due to its reliance on exclusively primary sources and lack of any real content more substantive than the fact that she exists. Bearcat (talk) 18:48, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Elected politician, member of the governing body of Australia's 3rd largest city, population about 2.25 million. Passes WP:POLITICIAN on that basis, in my view. Carrite (talk) 17:52, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The thing that's lacking, though, is reliable sourcing. Even a person who cleanly passes one of our inclusion guidelines is still not entitled to keep an unsourced or primary sourced article, and can still be deleted for failing to cite reliable source coverage — the only concession being that it can subsequently be recreated again if real sourcing shows up. It's not the mere assertion of notability that gets a person past one of our notability guidelines — it's the quality of the sourcing that can be provided to verify the assertion. Bearcat (talk) 17:45, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Carrite, Brisbane's a big city, but they also have a big city council, with 26 councilors. Considering WP:POLITICIAN, subject doesn't meet criteria #1 (international, national, or subnational (i.e. province-wide) office), #2 (local politician with significant press coverage), or #3 (meeting general notability criteria), so I'm not sure how you'd consider this part of the guideline a basis for keeping the article. Agyle (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:GNG and Notability is not inherited. It doesn't matter what position she holds if she is not active enough to generate significant coverage. --Bejnar (talk) 17:36, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Did not find significant coverage of the subject in independent reliable sources to meet WP:GNG or WP:POLITICIAN. I found several sources of one-sentence mentions of her presence at various meetings or events, photo captions in which she is mentioned, but I don't consider these to be significant coverage (e.g., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8). This Courier Mail article provides a medium amount of coverage about projects on which Owen-Taylor commented. Agyle (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep as per . There are numerous references in Australian newspapers, although I agree that each one is often only a sentence or two, or a quote here or there. Thing is, this lady is a very active politician, going everywhere, attending to all kinds of issues, active, busy, quoted on many topics, and maybe it is just that democracy is much more active in Australia than in the USA. She is clearly an important figure in Brisbane politics -- as pointed out a city of several million people, Australia's third largest, and most notably mentioned in the movie On the Beach as one of the last holdout cities before Melbourne succumbed to radiation, in case anybody saw that movie. She has many important tasks in Brisbane government: deputy council chair, deputy finance chairperson, economic development, and the Lord Mayor on multicultural affairs, whatever that is, but is sounds like they could give her a stallion to ride around for that one, plus costume, issuing edicts maybe even, issuing firebolts and epithets. Of the numerous references, several mention her in depth: this article is almost entirely about her, she is covered extensively in this article, she was a prime focus when angry residents protested her office, and she was featured prominently in this article. Taken together, in sum, with multiple in-depth independent references supplemented by numerous articles in which she is clearly active, quoted, working on many projects, etc, suggests she clearly meets the general notability guideline.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Tomwsulcer, I've checked out your links, my good man, and the problem with the articles that you mentioned-- and it is a common one on Wikipedia-- is that they aren't really about her, they are about a park or a ward or a project and though she may be quoted extensively in the article that doesn't really make the article about her (if we were discussing an article on the park or the ward, these articles would totally go towards verifying their notability, though!). That is why I don't think they add up to bona fide notability (at least, not yet, anyway!  But perhaps soon...?)  Just some thoughts.  I hear Brisbane is a lovely city, though.  KDS 4444  Talk  04:35, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , I see somewhat your point, in that the current eighteen references focus on what she does (her actions, policies, statements etc) rather than who she is (her beliefs, backstory, education etc). But my question is, can we separate what we do from who we are? Can we separate actions from identity? My sense is they are tightly intertwined, that what we do as humans and who we are as humans are inseparable, that we define ourselves by our actions. Consider American politician Barack Obama: there are numerous references about what he does in his biographical article. What does he do? Obama signs this bill, does this, signs this bill, or this, or won't fund this project, and so forth. Who is Obama? He is the person doing these things. These references are in Obama's wiki-article, rightly so, because they establish notability; if we remove these references on the basis that the focus of each one is not strictly about Obama and who he is, then the article is reduced to practically nothing. Similarly, by the numerous references about Owen-Taylor's actions as a leading politician in the 3rd largest Australian city, a picture emerges of who she is: builder of playgrounds, roads, waterways (which resulted in conflict with residents etc), pushing forward a $215 million restoration of Brisbane's city hall, etc. It may not seem important to people living in other countries, but it is important to Australians. Further, there are sixty references to Owen-Taylor in the Courier Mail but viewing them is blocked by a paywall; I was only able to view one.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete – Agyle says it's a big city, but the important fact is that the city has 25 such councilors plus the Lord Mayor. How is this person more notable than the others?  – S. Rich (talk) 03:43, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The issue of other councilors and their notability is not relevant here; the question is, is she notable? I believe she is.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 11:08, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails Point 3 of WP:POLITICIAN, extensive searching found no significant coverage in any source, let alone reliable secondary sources. SPACKlick (talk) 10:55, 14 July 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.