Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Cotton (Manitoba 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. Mz7 (talk) 04:40, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

James Cotton (Manitoba politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article was created (by me) in 2007, a time when any leader of a registered federal or provincial party in Canada was automatically considered notable enough for a biographical entry. Standards have changed since then, and there's nothing to indicate that the subject passes the current threshold for notability – he never received any real depth or breadth of press coverage, and not only was he not a candidate in the one election for which he was party leader, but the party didn't field any candidates in that election and dissolved shortly thereafter. I'm still an inclusionist when it comes to ambiguous cases, but this isn't one of these; the subject pretty obviously fails WP:NPOL, and there's absolutely no reason to believe the article can be transformed into something more credible. CJCurrie (talk) 01:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions. CJCurrie (talk) 02:01, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CJCurrie (talk) 02:02, 18 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nominator is entirely correct that Wikipedia's notability standards for politicians have evolved in the decade since he created this — we used to automatically accept all leaders of political parties, even minor fringe ones, but in 2017 we've deprecated that, and now require that the person is actually sourceable enough to pass WP:GNG in his own right. But Cotton just doesn't really have that — the party failed to nominate any candidates at all in the election that occurred during his leadership, and so the depth of coverage he needs to clear GNG just isn't actually there. Including his name in the party's article, without a separate standalone bio, gives exactly the same amount of information that we can actually source properly here. Bearcat (talk) 22:37, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet the inclusion criteria for politicians.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:30, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete – Now if only we could change the guideline that says all athletes are automatically notable. Kendall-K1 (talk) 15:22, 25 August 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.