Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Hill (Jersey 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   keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Goodvac (talk) 07:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Bob Hill (Jersey politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not sure subject is notable. The references linked do mention him, but only in passing, he is not the true subject of the article. Gaijin42 (talk) 20:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

You've jumped in very quickly: I created this article only this afternoon and plan to do more work on it in the coming weeks. You say you are "not sure". Can you be more specific about your concerns? Hill has held national elected office in Jersey for 18 years. He is a local political figure who has received significant press coverage.Andrew Le Sueur (talk)


 * As stated in the Jersey Evening Post of 20 October 2011, he is one of the two longest serving Deputies. Clearly a notable figure in Jersey politics; first stood for election as Deputy in a by-election in Trinity in 1992, and has been a key figure in many legislative changes since being elected in 1993 (BTW I am far from being one of his political supporters!) Man vyi (talk) 13:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Clearly even though he has now lost his seat, he is historically significant in terms of the time in the States and propositions brought, and surely there is no policy for deleting politicians just because they have lost an election?

--TonyinJersey (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 14:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — frankie (talk) 14:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, as there is clearly some notability here. We do have a policy about politicians who lose elections, but it refers to candidates who have never been elected. Since Mr. Hill has been elected for a significant period of time, and since coverage does not seem to be lacking, I think this one is a clear keep. We should firm up the references, though. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 19:02, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * change to keep based on the additional references, and the clarifications, I think he can be kept. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:08, 24 October 2011 (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.