Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Streicker


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 21:11, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

John Streicker

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Biography of a person whose principal claim of notability is having been an unsuccessful candidate in an election, thereby failing WP:POLITICIAN. This was previously disputed on the grounds that he's "locally important" (as if that counted for much), but that distinction merely asserted — with the article relying on WP:PRIMARYSOURCES and trivial coverage which merely mentions him in passing, rather than reliable sources which are actually about him, the article still fails to actually demonstrate his "local importance" in a manner that would actually meet our notability guidelines. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article fails to establish notability per WP:POLITICIAN. Pburka (talk) 23:29, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep He does fail WP:POLITICIAN, but passes WP:GNG. He would appear to be a thorn in many sides over environmental issues, and gnews shows plenty of traffic with his name.  Dennis Brown (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It may certainly be possible that he passes WP:GNG in principle — but he certainly doesn't do it on the basis of this article as it's currently written and "sourced". Bearcat (talk) 04:15, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * That makes it an edit issue, not an issue of passing or failing the criteria for inclusion. Lots of articles here need work. Dennis Brown (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not good enough to assert that the article meets our inclusion guidelines because you assert the existence of reliable sources which aren't present in the article and haven't been provided by you either. The article itself has to show, and reliably source, that he's sufficiently notable to be on here; any article which doesn't do so properly can be deleted absolutely anytime someone notices the problem. Bearcat (talk) 21:13, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 21:45, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 21:48, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - No coverage in reliable sources to establish notability. As he was not elected, he dos not meet WP:POLITICIAN.  Hi notability as an enviromentalist needs to be established with significant coverage in reliable sources, which I cannot find. -- Whpq (talk) 15:59, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete Contrary to Dennis Brown's results, my Google News Archive search did not find significant coverage of him as an activist - only passing election coverage as a minor-party candidate, and a few quotes as a spokesman for the Green Party on Arctic issues. --MelanieN (talk) 20:07, 28 May 2011 (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.