Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cameron Brewer


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:00, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Cameron Brewer

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A Councillor is a local government politician. Generally these are ten a penny. My local council has 40 of them. This council has 20 of them. Being a councillor is not, of itself, a notable item. This chap: "A total of 18,228 people voted for him – making him the fifth highest polling Auckland councillor" Well, that doesn't make him notable either. Even the one who came top isn't notable. This is far more like a "Find your local candidate on WIkipedia" effort than an article on a genuinely notable person. Fails notability. Fails as an election biography leaflet too. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 17:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. gadfium 18:26, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. gadfium 18:26, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep: Following the formation of the Auckland Council in 2011 we decided that the 20 councillors would meet notability per WP:POLITICIAN. I will raise this with WP:NZ as this will effect other articles as well. Certaintly no argument that this article needs improvement, but I think the size of the council, and the way it was formed, means the councillors are notable in their own right. Mattlore (talk) 19:31, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * From the policy you quote: "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"." Nothing explains how this individual qualifies. He has no inherent notability. The others must stand or fall on their own merits. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 19:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Auckland is the largest city in New Zealand. Local politicians may be "ten a penny," but elected members of governing local councils for major cities are presumed notable. Carrite (talk) 20:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Cite policy. Who presumes them to be notable? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Obviously meets requirements.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld  20:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Didn't before, does now :) Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn article has been given a good set of references and COI puffery has been removed. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 22:24, 17 January 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.