Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brendon Browne


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 22:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Brendon Browne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable by WP:DIPLOMAT ("Diplomats who have participated in a significant way in events of particular diplomatic importance that have been written about in reliable secondary sources.") AFAIK Browne, like most other diplomats, has never been involved in an “event of particular diplomatic importance”.

This particular unreferenced article reads oddly. If the subject was the Canadian High Commissioner to the Commonwealth of Dominica, why did he "present his credentials at the Citadelle of Québec"? Why should he "be styled His Excellency by Canadians . . ." etc. This is not clear to me, but then there are no references. . . .  Klein zach  12:09, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete I would guess it's the other way around, that he was Dominica's high commissioner in Canada. There's even a short BBC article to this effect, or something like that. Regardless, that was the only Gnews coverage of this personage. Appears to fail WP:BIO by a mile. Ray  Talk 19:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. He was the fifth and final High Commissioner of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States . He's frequently quoted in newspapers: . He appears in a Canadian Who's Who: . Pburka (talk) 00:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Only appears to "address the subject directly in detail." Since "multiple sources are generally expected," to meet WP:GNG I lean toward delete, waiting to see if more secondary sources about the subject appear. The question is not whether he served his country, but whether there are reliable sources about the subject. Enos733 (talk) 04:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The Who's Who reference provides a brief but detailed biography. On-line archives of Caribbean newspapers seem to be scarce, so the sources I reported (after only a few minutes of Googling) are, I suspect, only a small subset of the sources which actually exist. Pburka (talk) 11:37, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * That he was the final holder of a diplomatic office so important that it was closed to save money in 2011 does not raise his profile, in my opinion. Nor are trivial quotations in the local press. That's what ambassadors do. So far, he appears to have less press coverage than your typical Senator's press secretary. Ray  Talk 05:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. I continue to maintain that diplomatic heads of mission have a presumption of notability, no matter how small the country they are from. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: I note the RfC: A proposal to see if consensus has changed regarding notability of certain diplomats, possibly modifying the guideline WP:DIPLOMAT. This discusses changes to the WP guidelines in line with the opinions of Necrothesp and Pburka. At the moment WP:DIPLOMAT and WP:GNG do not give the presumption of notability referred to by Necrothesp.  Klein zach  11:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The RfC actually has three otucomes, one keeps DIPLOMAT the same, the second presumes notability of the ambassador, and the third presumes notability of the position.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As I said, it's what I believe, which is perfectly acceptable at AfD. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:04, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep for some of Pburka's sources. At least a couple of them are not trivial. Cavarrone (talk) 08:51, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar   &middot;   &middot;  20:42, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep There seem to be sufficient RSs for any version of the guideline.  DGG ( talk ) 17:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I would err on the side of keep for this one. Holds a high ranking position tile. Once the RFC finds a suitable resolution, the grounds of this AFD can be revisited. In the meantime, looking over a WP:BEFORE did reveal something interesting sources such as the BBC. Mkdw talk 06:52, 9 May 2013 (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.