Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Carter (New Orleans)


 * 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 00:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

James Carter (New Orleans)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreferenced, promotional, resume-like treatment of an individual who has only been the subject of limited press coverage, all within New Orleans as far as I can see. A previous version of the article included references, but even then didn't clearly pass WP:GNG. (And it's a bit WP:WAX, but New Orleans city councilmen don't tend to have articles.) --BDD (talk) 19:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. --BDD (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --BDD (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. --BDD (talk) 19:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Local official only. Enos733 (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Keep. Other New Orleans (Orleans Parish) Council members are in Wikipedia. Their constituencies are larger than those of legislators, who are included. Why delete this one? Rammer (talk) 22:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Because of WP:BIO, specifically WP:POLITICIAN. If you mean state legislators, they're almost always notable as "members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature." A politician who hasn't at least held any sort of statewide office needs to meet WP:GNG, which I don't think Carter does. --BDD (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete, has received multiple mentions in multiple reliable sources, however none I would consider meet significant coverage as required by WP:GNG. Therefore, I have to go with deletion.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:35, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak delete per my standards for lawyers. He appears to me to be fairly notable on the local scene, but not beyond that.  I'd like to have more information, i.e., a leading editor (managing editor, editor-in-chief, executive editor, president) of a law review or journal at an accredited law school, moot court competitions, bar association activities, Inns of Court, etc.  He's not a tenured, full-time law professor.  He's a city councillor. I could be convinced to "keep" if there were more facts that show notability. Bearian (talk) 18:54, 4 February 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.