Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Buors


 * 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. § FreeRangeFrog croak 18:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Chris Buors

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Never received more than a few hundred votes in any election and never held elected office. Fails WP:NPOL. No significant coverage, just one article on a conviction. WP:POLOUTCOMES applies here. Cwobeel (talk) 22:42, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can't see how he's notable; the stub fails WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:GNG generally. In any case, the subject requested the article's deletion at Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard. Bearian (talk) 22:49, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2014 June 2.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 22:55, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
 * This article was created at a different time in Wikipedia's evolution, when the fact of being the leader of a political party — regardless of the party's degree of success or failure in politics — was a sufficient notability claim in and of itself, and articles didn't actually have to be as strictly and carefully sourced as they do now. Consensus has evolved away from that somewhat, however — as things stand now, an article about a political party leader, especially if it's a WP:BLP, can now be deleted if its sourcing isn't really solid. Strictly speaking, the fact that the subject wants it deleted is irrelevant, as if a person passes our notability rules it's not Wikipedia policy to give them a right to say we can't write about them. What is determinative here, however, is that the sourcing is really poor — after the nominator cleaned up for bad and invalid and primary and dead sources, there was only one substantive reliable source left. Given that he was a party leader and candidate, his name may certainly be mentioned in the appropriate articles about the appropriate parties and elections, but we don't need a poorly sourced standalone BLP here. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:18, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:42, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:42, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Delete When the subject of a BLP requests deletion in good faith, honoring the request is the right thing to do. Joefromrandb (talk) 00:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 05:06, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: Agree with the above, but only when the figure is of borderline notability, as it is here. No-one should have an automatic right to deletion of their article if it clearly meets WP:GNG.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't say that anyone has the right to deletion of their article; they clearly don't. I said that honoring such a request for deletion is the right thing to do. Joefromrandb (talk) 14:56, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not satisfy WP:GNG. Thousands of people have stood for elections and received a few hundred votes, and thousands have been activists—there is no claim of notability. Johnuniq (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete An extremely minor politician who has never won any office, anywhere.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:38, 5 June 2014 (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.