Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernie Wolfe (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 delete. Kurykh (talk) 03:27, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Bernie Wolfe (politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. WP:BLP of a person notable only as a city councillor, in a city not internationally prominent enough to hand its city councillors an WP:NPOL pass. While consensus formerly accepted Winnipeg as a city that got its councillors into Wikipedia on the grounds that it was listed in the article on global city, that's more recently been deprecated because it was listed only in the "sufficiency" class of quasi-global cities and not as a true alpha, beta or gamma class world city. But what we have for sourcing here is not enough to get him over WP:GNG in lieu -- this is based on just two pieces of local coverage about his death, which would be expected in the local media, and a couple of glancing namechecks of his existence in books about other people. This is not enough to demonstrate a city councillor as more notable than the norm, which is the standard that Winnipeg's city councillors now have to meet. Bearcat (talk) 20:34, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:34, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:34, 9 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete. I concur that this article probably doesn't meet current requirements. The problem, of course, is not that Mr. Wolfe has become less notable, but that our notability standards are a moving target. Not that that's an argument to keep this article - we do need more sourcing - but just something that grinds my gears. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 20:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete city councilors at this level are not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:15, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. Bearian (talk) 22:44, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I think this is a stellar example of "consensus" being hastily applied. I am dubious of all the unsourced awards and would like to see them removed, or at a minimum given references, but I can't fathom how this subject could ever be considered not notable. As UltraExactZZ suggests, this idea of notability is a moving target and editors who insist on deletion ought to realize how the pendulum could (and should) swing to a wider interpretation. Sadly, at that point, many of these entries will be gone. Bangabandhu (talk) 04:06, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:POLOUTCOMES. It is not that city councilmembers are not notable, but that there is not a presumption of notability for city councilmembers. As Bearcat recently wrote, WP:NPOL notability "is achieved in one of two ways: either the coverage nationalizes into sources far beyond the geographic range in which such coverage is merely expected, and/or the local coverage volumizes to the point where a much more substantial article can be written." In this case, it does not appear there is either the volume of substantive coverage, nor does there appear an expansion of geographic scope of coverage. --Enos733 (talk) 20:02, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:GNG. CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:51, 16 February 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.