Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Broome (politician)


 * 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. Shereth 17:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

David Broome (politician)

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

non-notable page listing one man's failure to achieve notability, reads like an ad Primal (talk) 00:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, failed political candidate.- gadfium 00:57, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions.   —Primal (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete While there is plenty of verifiable info on this person, I can't find anything that amounts to a clear demonstration of notability. The closest is probably the Michael Cullen speech, but I don't think inviting the Finance Minister to talk to your company really demonstrates notability. While there is coverage in reliable independant sources, I wouldn't call any of it significant in terms of detailed discussion of this person. He may be marginally notable, but it hasn't been demonstrated. Ryan Paddy (talk) 02:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no opinion on the article, but I needed to say that this is the best nomination ever ("one man's failure to achieve notability") and applies to so many articles. JuJube (talk) 02:52, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Seconded - Richard Cavell (talk) 07:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - never held political office and no demonstration of notability on other grounds. Also sorely lacking in neutrality. dramatic (talk) 03:12, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete - this article has danced with deletion several times, and the author has had enough time to establish notability. It does seem awfully as though the accounts that are editing this article are single purpose accounts, which are being used to promote the subject of the article. The article is therefore tainted by bias. - Richard Cavell (talk) 07:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - marginal figure never got where he thinks he deserves to be. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  19:17, 10 July 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.