Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dougald Lamont (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Meets WP:POLITICIAN as is major provincial party leader who received significant coverage by the Canadian media. (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor (talk) 05:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Dougald Lamont
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Redirect to Manitoba Liberal Party leadership election, 2017. The election that was won by the individual was not a general election, but a party's internal election in which 600 party members voted in the second ballot to determine the outcome. Don't think this qualifies as meeting WP:POLITICIAN. red dogsix (talk) 02:54, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep the first deletion discussion occured when Lamont was simply a candidate. He subsequently won the leadership election and is now leader of the Manitoba Liberal Party and is therefore notable and passes WP: POLITICIAN, particularly as the party has seats in the provincial legislature. Nixon Now (talk) 03:04, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep We went through this the last time the Manitoba Liberal Party leader was elected (see:Rana Bokhari). In this case this convention was covered live till the end by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, CTV News, Global News, Toronto Star, Winnipeg Sun, and Winnipeg Free Press. In the end this is also the leader of a political party that is polling third in the polls and second in the city of Winnipeg. I would argue that there is significant media coverage of this individual and his party to warrant the inclusion of the article. See points two and three of WP:POLITICIAN. Krazytea ( talk ) 03:07, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Nixon Now (talk) 03:14, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. Nixon Now (talk) 03:14, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Even as the nominator the first time, when his notability claim was limited to being a candidate in a leadership election he hadn't won yet, I entirely accept that now that he's won it the notability equation has changed. We do accept the leadership of major political parties as a notability claim, regardless of whether the leader is actually part of the party's elected caucus yet or not, as long as the article can be sourced to enough reliable source coverage to clear WP:GNG rather than unsourced insider info or campaign brochures. The fact that it was an internal party election rather than a general election of the voting public is not the make or break condition at WP:NPOL — notability is not conditional on the kind of election involved (except in the isolated case of "everybody on city council gets a turn" mayoral rotations) or on the number of people who actually voted in it, but on whether or not it resulted in the subject holding a notable position. This certainly still needs further work before it can be assessed as a good article, but it's already about as good as can be expected for a person who just won the leadership three days ago — further coverage will come, because this is a major party which holds seats in the Manitoba legislature and thus the media will pay more attention to its leader than they would to the leader of some minor fringe-wacko party. And as for the initial attempt to speedy it on G4 grounds, nominator is advised that subsequent recreation of a previously deleted article is not an automatic G4 in all instances — there are plenty of cases where a person's notability claim and sourceability has changed in the intervening time, such as a person who was only an election candidate at the time of the initial discussion but then won the election in the interim. G4 only applies if the notability claim and sourceability remain identical to the first time out, and not if circumstances have changed since the prior discussion. Bearcat (talk) 17:02, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - Appears to be sufficient coverage in independent sources to clear WP:POLITICIAN. --Jack Frost (talk) 06:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - I am in favor of automatically keeping all articles about political parties, their leaders, and their youth sections, regardless of size or ideology. This is the sort of material that our readers have a right to expect in a comprehensive encyclopedia. If you want to consider this an IAR argument, so be it, but I believe that it is a majority view at AfD. May well additionally pass GNG, I will leave my argument there, however. Carrite (talk) 14:48, 29 October 2017 (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.