Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Gallant


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Brian Gallant

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unsourced bio of a person notable only as an unsuccessful candidate in a Canadian provincial election. Was previously tagged for prod, but a person who has never previously edited Wikipedia, except for one single edit to this very same article approximately six months earlier, replaced that with an "under construction" tag and then proceeded to abandon the article again even though that tag is explicitly meant only for articles that are being worked on in an immediate way. The "references" at the bottom of the article aren't about the subject, but simply links to the web pages of organizations mentioned in the article, none of which mentions Mr. Gallant at all — so it fails both WP:N and WP:RS as currently written. Delete unless real sources proving notability can be shown; there isn't even enough referenced content here to merge it anywhere. Bearcat (talk) 04:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.   -- RayAYang (talk) 04:33, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.   -- RayAYang (talk) 04:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- RayAYang (talk) 04:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. A gnews search produces many people of the same name, none of whom appear to be him, at least in the English-language results. RayAYang (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems rather pointless. You have to have some noteworthiness to be in an encyclopedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstanton (talk • contribs)
 * Note: please type four tildes, to sign your messages. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 05:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete--this is a vanity piece. Drmies (talk) 05:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I do agree that it is currently a vanity piece, and I'm surprised that it has lasted this long. But he does appear on the cusp of notability, insofar as Wikipedia is dominated by inclusionists.  Perhaps he will do just one more thing . . .  Un  sch  ool  06:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I believe that this person has achieved enough to be in wikipedia, several times. - Richard Cavell (talk) 07:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 * But where are the sources? Bearcat (talk) 15:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - The sources have been added. Was on 3rd page of Globe and Mail, made headlines and continues do so on local level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buddy10 (talk • contribs) 16:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I beleive this person has achieved enough and is well referenced —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgauth (talk • contribs) 16:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per RayAYang. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Of the sources provided, none go beyond campaign coverage. Subject therefore fails WP:POLITICIAN and WP:ONEEVENT. Nuttah (talk) 13:49, 7 December 2008 (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.