Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Austin Petersen (politician)


 * 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 speedy delete per G4 (recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion: Articles for deletion/Austin Petersen). Rebb ing   19:51, 12 April 2016 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Austin Petersen (politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Petersen previously had an article which was redirected to Libertarian Party presidential primaries, 2016 as result of this Afd: Articles for deletion/Austin Petersen. Another user attempted to recreate the article by changing the title to Austin Wade Petersen. That page was also redirected to the aforementioned Libertarian primaries article, and semi-protected as well. A DRV discussion followed, resulting in "no action". This is yet another attempt to circumvent the earlier Afd result by tweaking the title, in case with the disambiguation "politician" in the title. As the latest version does nothing to address the issues that resulted in deletion originally, and in no way establishes notability per the guidelines of WP:BIO, WP:NPOL or WP:42, it should be speedily deleted (Note: an earlier attempt by another editor to do so was contested by the article' creator). No need for another redirect as disambiguation is entirely unneccessary given that 2 redirects already exist for Petersen, and there appears to no other person or subject by that name that would feasibly be a search term on Wikipedia. Ddcm8991 (talk) 18:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment User:DGG placed a WP:A7 speedy deletion tag. The creator removed the speedy tag, which is not allowed. I have re-instated it. If an admin declines A7 it can be deleted under WP:G4 as a "Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion" AusLondonder (talk) 18:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've removed the speedy deletion tag as the article states the subject has taken part in a televised debate for the Libertarian nomination for the US presidency. Although that certainly doesn't confer notability it is an assertion of significance. (To be fair the article didn't say this in the text when originally tagged.) G4 does not apply because the article has never been deleted as the result of a deletion discussion.  Hut 8.5  21:28, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That isn't correct, see Articles for deletion/Austin Petersen and I have requested speedy deletion under WP:G4 AusLondonder (talk) 08:35, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. AusLondonder (talk) 18:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - As stated, there's no need for a disambiguation page as there's nothing to disambiguate against. There's some argument to be made for the subject's increasing, perhaps GNG-satisfying notability, but that can be, and has been, discussed at the original article's talk page. —Torchiest talkedits 19:07, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Should be speedied, but if it isn't, he fails the notability standard for politicians and I don't see any other significant coverage. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Since the last (2nd, 3rd?) deletion, there have been no significant increase in Mr. Petersen's notability. In fact, his popularity is decreasing. In about 1-1/2 months the Libertarian Party convention will take place. Petersen opposes one of two foundation principles of the Party Statement of Principles so it is highly unlikely he will be nominated. Nomination would give Petersen notability. Perhaps it is best to wait until the convention to see if he is worthy of notability. Buncoshark 20:32, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, without a redirect. By doing so we avoid the technical argument that no previous deletion took place. When searching for an article about "Austin Petersen" without the "(politician)" descriptive, readers will come up with the existing redirect. If Petersen gets notability via non-SPS sources, then a new article (using the redirect) can be created. – S. Rich (talk) 22:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep When the page was initially posted, I would have probably agreed with the NN designation.  At this point, however, Petersen has received a significant amount of national media attention, including a nationally televised debate, and clearly meets notability criteria.   This is beginning to reek of political motives.  PlainSight (talk) 22:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that should be discussed at the original page, not here. This is a pointless disambiguation that seems to have been created to skirt around process. I already started a section about notability at the original talk page a couple weeks ago. Bring your arguments there. —Torchiest talkedits 23:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as I also concur with the original speedy as it's noticeable to see nothing suggest any solid independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  06:10, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment This article in question has now been speedily deleted under the criteria of WP:G4. AusLondonder (talk) 12:07, 12 April 2016 (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.