Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Poe


 * 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. Most participants seem to agree that the subject is adequately notable, and thus consensus is that the article should be kept as such. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:58, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Bob Poe

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non notable unelected political candidate at state level, article is list of trivia about his non notable life. Wuh Wuz  Dat  07:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand that there may be the impression that this page is being created purely for advertising purposes, but I would like to point out that Bob Poe has had a huge impact on this state and that while he may be running for Governor of Alaska, that doesn't mean that his accomplishments are not noteworthy. I will also point out that the two other Democratic contenders for this office, Hollis French and Ethan Berkowitz, already have wikipedia pages listing some of their involvements with Alaska politics. I think that Bob Poe is a notable person who should have a page on this site. If you have specific concerns about the content, please let me know. I tried to write it as objectively as I could, but I'm happy to make changes to comply with the wiki-guidelines.

Thank you.

I have seen the message that was left explaining the issues with the article. I apologize for my lack of knowledge, but I'm trying to pick it up as fast as I can. I was under the impression that Alaskan Democratic Politicians were able to have pages through wikipedia, but I'm still figuring out how to properly categorize it. Is he not allowed to have a page because he has not yet been elected?

I also did want to specify that I am not Bob Poe. I found out that he needed some help on his campaign and thought I could write an objective article about his work with the state. I will try to make the necessary changes to make it un-biased. Governorbob (talk) 08:21, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Several reliable sources seem to cover the subject. and Google News has 300 more. Regards  So  Why  09:45, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per SoWhy. Seems notable enough. Give it a few references and you'll be OK. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:15, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Userfy He is not per se notable unless and until he qualifies for the Primary - which he has not so far done. WP:CRYSTAL applies -- I suggest it be placed into userspace with no bias against moving to mainspace if and when he actully runs.   At this point, objectively, hundreds of people may announce oplans to run for (say) President, but WP practice is tht they do not get articles on that basis.  Collect (talk) 12:57, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * True but unlike most others, he did have several previous positions and significant coverage, so he probably meets WP:BIO, even if he does not meet WP:POLITICIAN. Regards  So Why  13:01, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Y2K Senior Project Manager and Commissioner of Administration" was his highest position. "Worked for" is not any claim for notability in the political sphere.  Not notable for that.  Is Hollis French notable enough> I doubt it. Otherstuffexists is not a reason for much at all. Ethan Berkowitz has held significant legislative posts, was a prior candidate for Lt. Gov.,  Combination is notable enough.   Poe has not been elected to anything, and this should be userfied until and unless he qualifies for a primary as a minimum. Collect (talk) 13:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You might consider re-reading Wikipedia's notability guidelines in WP:BIO. The primary criterion in full: A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. Doesn't have anything to do if whether mentions of him in those sources was because he "worked for" someone or held some other kind of position. Hollis French clearly qualifies under this -- he's been mentioned in the press numerous times for his work in the Alaska Senate and as chair of Senate Judiciary, as well as all the hullabaloo around Troopergate. As explained with my vote below, Poe has had numerous mentions in the press for the work he's done in his various positions. Given those mentions, he meets notability even though none of those positions were elected positions. -- Yksin (talk) 21:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * See WP:POLITICIAN. He does not meet choice 1 (at least a first-level sub-national opffice). He does not meet choice 2 (Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage). He does not meet choice 3 even (Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office) as he was never elected to anything nor even tried, nor is the candidacy for Governor more than his desire -- like several hundred candidates for President last year who never even made the ballot. Unless and until he qualifies at least for a primary, he fails to meet notability guidelines.    WP does not say ";pts of local papers saying you want to run" makes you notable, as that would mean all the folks who announced their candidacy for President would automatically be notable for WP (they all get press coverage, to be sure).  Sorry -- no damage is going to be done by saying "wait until the primary" for an article at all. Collect (talk) 22:16, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:POLITICIAN does not trump this statement on WP:BIO: ''Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article ." As long as he meets that primary criterion -- and he does -- he needs nothing else.
 * I'm currently going back through all 288 newspaper articles in Newsbank for the three major Alaska newspapers (Anchorage Daily News, Juneau Empire, Fairbanks Daily News-Miner). References to him are found in every year but two from 1985 to 1999 (1992 & 1996), including his public service under several different governors (he's served a total of 5) as well as his heading up the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation. Some of the articles in fact are full length articles that go into considerable detail about his biography & career (i.e., are more than just "Bob Poe, head of AEDC [or whatever he was in charge of at the time] said thus'n'such" type articles. Clear notability.
 * If Bob Poe was only an unelected political candidate with no record in secondary sources outside of his candidacy, your argument would have merit. If Wikipedia only had biographies of politicians, your argument would have merit. But since neither of those things is the case, your argument fails. Poe has a significant record of public service & public achievement which is recognized by the coverage he's received over almost a quarter of a century in the Alaska press. That's notable.  He'd deserve an article here without any political candidacy at all. --Yksin (talk) 22:38, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree that WP is intended to have BLPs on every "Commissioner of Adminsitration" for every state. His other "public service" is trivial at best.  Mentions other than his apparent candidacy in NYT? Zilch.  Lots of mentions for a Florida "Bob Poe" who actually was head of the Democratic Party in Florida.  Substance? Other than press releases and this candidacy, out of three hundred articles, I find a mere handful which actually say anything about him,    "“I have never run for office before,” he said. “I’ve thought of it, but always came to the conclusion that ‘no,’ I’m not going to do it.” And, concerned about lacking name recognition, Poe knew he needed all of the two years leading up to November 2010’s election day. “Who’s Bob Poe?” was a question posed by the Alaska Ear in announcing an early rumor that Poe intended to run."  sure appears to be a person who is admittedly not notable. And a search for "commissioner of administration" finds zilch mentions in all of WP.  Collect (talk) 23:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Who said anything about WP being "intended" to have an article on every Commissioner for Administration for every state? I never said any such thing. Nonetheless, Poe clearly meets Wikipedia's primary criterion for notability under WP:BIO. The fact that he hasn't been mentioned in the NYT is neither here nor there: NYT isn't the only "reliable source independent of the subject of the article" that Wikipedia accepts as reliable.  The fact he's not a household name (as Sheila Toomey of ADN's political gossip column Alaska Ear, & Poe himself, recognize) doesn't mean he's not notable according to Wikipedia standards: he still meets that primary criterion.  Sorry that you apparently don't have access to Newsbank to see the numerous references inclusing some lengthy articles about Poe in the Alaska press. Not all newspapers have all their archives on Google. Some of those sources will become apparent as the originator of the article & I add more info to this article. (I've emailed her copies of the best sources I found in Newsbank's archives & she says she'll be working on it tonight.  She's also registered for a change of username.) --Yksin (talk) 23:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete until after the primary, at least Candidates are not notable merely by being candidates. Especially when the candidate hasn't even gotten past the primary stage. Sure, there are references and coverage, but take a closer look at those references. All of them are local news sources covering a local story. The St. Louis paper is only covering this because he is a Missouri native. The Alaska TV stations and newspapers are covering it because it's... happening in Alaska. They wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't cover it. But it's a current story, so naturally there will be a good bit of press between now and the actual primary. If he wins the primary, then I'll reconsider. Until then, the notability isn't really there. DarkAudit (talk) 15:37, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - As written, it's a thinly-veiled curriculum vitae. It needs to assert notability more effectively or go.  Newt  (winkle) 20:08, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Subject is clearly notable. Per WP:BIO on politicians, Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article." Here's that primary criterion in full: A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.


 * A check of the database Newsbank (America's Newpapers) for coverage of the name "Bob Poe" finds these mentions in the states three highest circulation newspapers:


 * Anchorage Daily News -- 188 mentions (since 1985)
 * Juneau Empire -- 92 mentions (since 1998)
 * Fairbanks Daily News-Miner -- 8 mentions (since 2001)


 * The articles I've taken a look at so far especially cover his record as Commissioner of Administration under Gov. Tony Knowles and his record as the president of the Anchorage Economic Development Corporation.


 * It's typical for people to claim that a figure is non-notable simply because they personally have never heard of them, or to assume that their notability (if they're a politician) is based purely on whether or not they've been elected, when it is frequently the case that those people have significant levels of achievement and recognition in the press or other reliable secondary sources. The fact that, as DarkAudit claims, The Alaska TV stations and newspapers are covering it because it's... happening in Alaska is irrelevant -- Wikipedia's notability guidelines don't say squat about a person having to be notable outside his own locale in order to be considered notable.


 * I hope that admin who decides on this AfD actually reads these comments, because it's clear that some of the commentators are voting based on their own definitions of notability, instead of the criteria used by Wikipedia itself.


 * Meantime, we have a new article that's clearly in need of improvement that was started by a new & inexperienced editor. That's no reason to delete the article: it's a reason to improve it, & also to help the new editor learn & gain experience.  SoWhy and I have also both suggested on the originator's talk page that s/he change her/his username to reflect that s/he is not in fact Bob Poe editing his own page. -- Yksin (talk) 21:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The ample reliable sources about this individual attest to his notability. WP:POLITICIAN does not preclude the inclusion of biographies about candidates who pass WP:BIO / WP:GNG. Wikipedia is not paper, so there is no reason to delete this article, which passes Verifiability and Notability (people). Having reviewed the article, I do not see any indication that this is promotion. I've added a couple more references to the article to verify the uncited statements. The article is neutrally-written and clearly establishes notability. Deletion would be unreasonable and would be a net negative to the encyclopedia. Cunard (talk) 00:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep After numerous errors on my part being brought to my attention, I believe that I, with the help of others, have made the necessary changes to the Bob Poe page so that it will comply with the WP:BIO guidelines.  I made a gross error in judgment when I chose the username "Governorbob" to create the page, which, as you can see, I have mended.  I feel that the number of sources and the neutrality of the article should ease the concerns of the first admin that felt the page should be deleted.  I hope that the administrators reviewing this case will feel the same way.  Thank you. DoomCow (talk) 08:27, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep    The articles in the default search in Gnews are  mainly about a florida politician of the same name. The better search is  which gives a few substantial hits--the best ref is  which calls him as relatively unknown compared to the other candidates, but is a major story. This confirms my guess that with sufficient expansion of gnews and a look in local sources, essentially every state level politician who has been a major party candidate for anything, or who has even made a substantial run for such a candidacy, will be found notable by the GNG. Whether we should cover them here is another matter.  Perhaps one of intentions when the GNG was originally adopted, was that it would keep out people of this very minor level of accomplishment, on the assumption that nobody would bother to write about them, and that sources would not be found. It seems to be gradually working the other way: reporters will write about anyone in politics, or anyone or anything else where they can get a story, and sources will be found for all of these. On a scale of 1-10 of inclusiveness, I tend to be maybe a 7. the GNG was thought to be 5, but it is now 8, and going higher.     DGG ( talk ) 20:32, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per SoWhy.--Epeefleche (talk) 13:31, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets notability guidelines. Additionally, per SoWhy. @Kate   (talk)  10:02, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. The intention of WP:POLITICIAN is to prevent Wikipedia being used as an election advertising billboard, which is exactly what is happening here. Yes, reliable sources can be quoted, but they are about his running for Governor. If we allow the argument that the GNG, based on sources like that, can over-ride WP:POLITICIAN, then POLITICIAN is a dead letter - every candidate for office can show press cuttings based on his being a candidate. I believe the right interpretation of POLITICIAN is that references to do with the candidacy do not count, and notability apart from the candidacy must be shown in order to have an article. JohnCD (talk) 17:42, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The general notability guideline supersedes any subject specific guidelines (indeed it is the first item on any of the specific guidelines). As shown above he clearly meets the general notability guideline so the article should be kept. Davewild (talk) 18:20, 27 November 2009 (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.