Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Chisholm (police chief)


 * 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The result was   Nomination withdrawn. Closing despite outstanding delete !vote per WP:IAR. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 14:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

John Chisholm (police chief)

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

Failes to pass WP:N Irunongames  •  play  00:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - first police chief of the largest police force in Canada. How is that not notable? Dodge rambler (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Chief Constables of Toronto inherently pass WP:BIO IMO.  young  american  (wtf?) 00:40, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. For a police chief in a city as big as Toronto, I would expect non-trivial mentions in major newspapers at least once a month. And the article already provides five such mentions. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 00:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  -- – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:53, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep High-profile job, notable, plenty of media coverage.  -shirulashem (talk) 00:54, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Very Notable. Pretty much the comments above cover that, I'm just putting in my vote. KMFDM FAN  (talk!) 01:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * snowball keep clearly notable. SYSS Mouse (talk) 02:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The refs appear to be obituaries, which fall afoul of WP:NOTNEWS and do not satisfy WP:BIO. Edison (talk) 03:10, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep They appear to be obituaries, to be sure, but news obituaries count as long as the newspaper is reliable, which I'm sure this is. The presence of a source nearly fifty years newer than the rest means that he doesn't fail BLP1E, or even BDP1E since he's dead rather than living.  Nyttend (talk) 03:38, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, and Rainbow trout.png Irunongames. Article does not fail WP:N. – blurpeace (talk)  13:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment When I nominated the article, the article was much smaller and only have one source. Sorry for any inconviance to the editer Irunongames  •  play  14:01, 16 July 2009 (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.