Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barclay McGain (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. ✗ plicit  14:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Barclay McGain
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

UPE issues were raised towards and after the end of the previous AFD, and creator was a few months later blocked as a sock. G5 declined due to intervening edits by other users. Leaving aside the SPIP/PROMO, it is unclear that there is in fact substantial coverage. I have not, unfortunately, yet reviewed the entire reference list, which appears to consist of "every single ghit on the subject", or close enough, but what I have reviewed is largely the newsorg equivalent of reaction videos, i.e. Alice Expert saying everyone is or ought to be very upset about this and how they don't endorse it.

Going back to self promotion: as alluded to by TheDownUnderEditor in the previous AfD and on the talk page, this is basically ubiquitous among conservatives wishing to puff themselves up and establish their credentials. It is hardly useful in establishing notability.

All in all, I do not see the sourcing required for a fundamental rewrite such that it may comply with our content policies, including WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTPROMO (even outside of the fact that a UPE creation is that by default). Even were it to exist, I do not believe the article as it currently stands would be any help towards that end.

Pinging the participants of the previous AFD: ITBF, Tytrox, Aoziwe, Styyx, Rybkovich, Houmanumi and Swordman97, if they're still interested in this article. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:05, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Conservatism,  and Australia. Alpha3031 (t • c) 14:05, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. I have changed my mind about this one. It doesn't look like the sources are required to pass WP:NPOL. There are sources, but nothing that would be considered "in-depth". The sockpuppet is alarming as well. Swordman97  talk to me 00:45, 9 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree in full with Swordman97's comments above, and maintain that the only notable story that broke the mainstream involving McGain (the schoolie's video) would be better suited to being a listed 'Controversy' on the Young LNP page. He is a university student and former political staffer who had some questionable social media posts, one of which had a brief moment of virality. Does not pass WP:NPOL or any aspect of WP:BIO. Houmanumi (talk) 12:40, 10 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete. There are some other reasons to delete it, too. Like, he seems to have too local notability par excellence. --Suitskvarts (talk) 18:02, 14 September 2022 (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.