Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Avellone (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   no consensus. The notability or lack thereof is not immediately clear but there are reasonable arguments on both sides. Certainly, being a losing candidate in a primary election is insufficient to pass WP:POLITICIAN, but there is some merit to the claim that his business career has generated enough courage to make Mr Avellone notable otherwise. When both sides present reasonable arguments, and the community is divided as it is here, the result must be that no consensus can be declared. Sjakkalle (Check!)  14:02, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Joseph Avellone
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The previous deletion discussion was closed an no consensus, in part because there was a desire not to rush to deletion as Avellone was part of a breaking news event (the 2014 Massachusetts gubernatorial election). As Avellone failed to make the primary ballot, this is no longer an issue. The references provided do not show that the subject of the article is notable beyond this one event, as he has not received significant coverage outside of this context (the only references in the article are a paragraph in Time Magazine and a quote in an article about HMOs). Hirolovesswords (talk) 22:35, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - If he actually made the ballot it would be appropriate to keep the article, but he didn't. It's either going to be Steve Grossman or Martha Coakley who wins the democratic nomination in September, they are well known. If Joseph Avellone made the ballot and was well known like Grossman and Coakley it would be more appropriate to keep but he was unable to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plyjacks (talk • contribs) 01:18, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Surprised by the nomination. Easy pass for WP:GNG or WP:NPEOPLE as far as I see. A lot of the coverage about him comes from the last 18 months while running for governor, sure, but he's got an impressive resume that removes ONEEVENT as a factor. Being notable for only WP:ONEEVENT isn't the same as receiving some coverage for a number of different things before getting a whole lot of coverage for one thing in particular (invoking ONEEVENT doesn't negate press from that one big event, it just requires some evidence that the person has received coverage for other stuff, too, even if not as substantial). Make all the arguments you want about individual items in the following list not making him notable, the fact of the matter is there appear to be one or more sources about him for each of these -- at least as far as I can tell. These, in combination with the recent election, makes him an easy keep: (1) Selectman (and Chairman of the Board of Selectmen) in Wellesley, Massachusetts; (2) Executive VP at PAREXEL; (3) health care advisor to Paul Tsongas during 1992 Presidential run; (3) health care advisor to John Kerry during 2004 Presidential run; (4) Profiled in Time Magazine in 1979 as one of "50 Faces for the Future"; (5) COO for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts; (6) CEO of Veritas Medicine; (7) Board of Directors at Boston Heart Diagnostics. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  03:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * While Avellone has done all of those things he has not received significant coverage for any of them. The only sources that mention his tenure as a Selectmen are articles about the gubernatorial election. The source for his time at PAREXEL and Veritas Medicine is the PAREXEL's website, a non-independent source that does nothing to show notability. The source that covers his work for the Kerry campaign is an article about another gubernatorial candidate that mentions Avellone only in passing. The source for his work at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts is an article about HMOs that only contains two small quotes from Avellone. There is no source in the article his work at Boston Heart Diagnostics nor is it even mentioned in the article. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 03:58, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * As a general rule, I don't like citing common outcomes and other such shortcuts in deletion discussions, but that's admittedly what I was trying to do: point to a series of job titles as not inherently notable, but generally suggestive that significant sources exist (i.e. why high schools are typically kept -- not because they have special properties, but because we can assume sources will exist). I'd be a hypocrite if I stuck to that line of argument when called into question, though. So here are the sources. PS: Not one of these is connected to the recent election (I only pulled articles pre-2013). All seem reliable (most from the Boston Globe). Many are negligible indeed. Many are not. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  05:15, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Selectman: Globe reports he's chosen as vice chairman (negligible mention), 1991 Globe article on Selectman win, speaking at somewhat more length to the Globe as selectman about David Locke in 1992
 * Blue Cross - speaking for the company in 1996 about drug benefits in the Boston Globe, talking to the Boston Globe in 1992 about how much they pay for smoking-related claims, commenting about Boston City Hospital for Blue Cross in the Boston Globe 1992, 1996 Knight Ridden Tribute article about seniors protesting a rate hike, Boston Globe mentions his promotion in 1994, says he'll be the "company's number two executive with responsibility for the core business", another from the Boston Globe in 1996 about Medex hikes, 1994 Boston Globe article about Blue Cross buying doctors' practices, another Globe story on medex from 1996, Bay State Banner article mentions him as VP in 1994, 1991 Globe article quotes him, primary source in 1994 Globe article about some report, and again in 1996..., and again in 1996, and again in 1996, but longer
 * Veritas: 2000 Boston Globe, 2006 Boston Globe, 2002 Drug Week article quotes him speaking as CEO,
 * Parexel: negligible indeed, but at least secondary source verified in this financial report via US Fed News Service, also this 2010 Health and Beauty Close-Up magazine article that quotes him for the company, Wireless News article from 2010 quotes him speaking for Parexel, China Weekly News in 2012,
 * Advisor to Tsongas: 1991 Globe article spends several paragraphs talking about him, also mentioning him as a selectman, 1992 Washington Post article talks about him in connection to Tsongas, says he "helped shape Tsongas's comprehensive health care plan"
 * As a spokesman for various companies he was quoted numerous times. However, none of these passing mentions demonstrate previous notability. Also, although the subject need not be the main topic of the source material for it to be considered significant coverage, it is interesting to note that in the two decades worth of articles provided, Avellone is not the main topic of any of them. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 15:04, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's break it down: There's no question he's notable for the recent election, right? And there have been many pieces written specifically about him for that, right? ONEEVENT, however, tells us that in such cases you have to consider if it's the event that should be covered instead (and, with elections, that's usually the case). It does not say that when a lot of someone's notoriety comes from one event, all of those sources about that event don't count and the person must start from scratch showing sources about other things. No, if it can be shown the person has also received significant coverage about other things, then ONEEVENT simply doesn't apply and we're back to the GNG or BASIC. Additional sources that are only about him are not necessary. See: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." He is the primary source for or a prominent subject (even if not the main subject) of many of the articles cited above. That he is not the sole subject of any of them isn't a deal-breaker.
 * Rewording: The question is, looking at all of the coverage about this person for all purposes (but excluding brief mentions and primary sources), is the coverage significant? Span time? Independent? The answer is yes. Next question: is it all for one event? No. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  15:42, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where you see "significant coverage about other things". The non-election sources do not provide any in-depth coverage. Most of them just give his name and his position with the company he worked for at the time, which is far from significant coverage. The only significant coverage he ever received comes from the 2014 election and therefore ONEEVENT does apply. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 16:44, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Hm. Well. A few of the above are minor mentions -- the ones I grabbed early in my search in response to your claim that the only articles that mention his various jobs are from election coverage. But anybody can click them or do their own research to see you're not fairly/accurately characterizing them (i.e. that "most of them just give his name and his position"). --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  22:13, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Face it: He didn't make the ballot for 2014 and the Governor's race will mostly be focusing on either Steve Grossman, Martha Coakley, Charlie Baker or Mark Fisher (who actually could make the ballot). I say delete the article and "IF" Joseph Avellone runs in 2018, then maybe wikipedia can reconsider. Not all selectman in Massachusetts can have their own Wikipedia article even if they helped a U.S. Senator run for President. Kegejoeco (aka Plyjacks) (talk) 18:19, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Face it? Ok, I've faced it. (I don't live in MA, btw). But Wikipedia doesn't actually care about job titles or elections or who runs for what. There are specific notability criteria that give us a shortcut to notability (e.g. win an Academy Award means lots of coverage, so you only need to know someone won an Academy Award). He didn't win, so indeed he does not receive one of those shortcuts/free passes. No argument there, to be sure. So it falls back to WP:GNG/WP:BIO just like most other people's Wikipedia pages. The question is whether there are sufficient sources talking about him in any capacity (combined; having established it's for multiple reasons already) sufficient to pass WP:GNG/WP:BIO. I find it hard to imagine an actor, musician, or baseball player with the same level of sourcing being deleted, so I fail to see why this person would be. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites talk  |  18:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It occurs to me you basically just reiterated your delete vote rationale and I responded by reiterating a bunch of stuff I've already said, too. Here's hoping we get some new blood in the discussion as it's presently heading for no consensus. --&mdash;  Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  |  18:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Put it this way if Joseph Avellone is not known to everyone in Massachusetts just some on Wikipedia and when he ran for Governor probably. Now he's not noticeable unless he runs for something else later. Even if he might pass something here he still doesn't need an article now because what good will it do. Kegejoeco (aka Plyjacks) (talk) 23:56, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia doesn't keep or delete articles based on what good it does or based on how many people know about something. Wikipedia doesn't care about state politics or what someone means to people of a certain state. It doesn't care what state anybody is in, editor or subject. The question of whether something is notable is a technical term that provides quasi-objective criteria precisely to avoid all of that. The question is: "has this person been the subject of significant coverage in reliable secondary sources?" Someone can run for this or that, but if sources aren't there it doesn't matter. Likewise someone can fail at everything he/she does but if there are plenty of sources, it doesn't matter. --&mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  |  00:10, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

This is a good time to point out that Ponyo Plyjacks voted to deleted at the previous AFD purely because a pet article of his was also deleted.  Calidum Talk To Me 22:17, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Indeed. Sort of what I had redacted from my own comments before (arguing in an opposite way at the mark fisher afd). But I think you mean Plyjacks, not Ponyo (they are not the same afaik, anyway). --&mdash; <span style="font-family:monospace, monospace;"> Rhododendrites <sup style="font-size:80%;">talk  |  07:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks.  Calidum Talk To Me 13:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Keep. The sources provided above show Avellone passes the general notability guideline. Sure, they probably need to be put in the article, but that is an editorial concern that doesn't affect whether or not he is notable.  Calidum Talk To Me 07:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete This should have been delete the first time, and nothing has changed except he didn't make the primary. I'm still not seeing significant coverage in RS.  GoldenRing (talk) 04:12, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - he would be barely notable even without losing the nomination, but much of what's available online, as noted above, is not exactly flattering. Bearian (talk) 16:30, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. The sources provided above by Avellone show that the subject is not just known for the election. I am not convinced that that pre-campaign sources provide "significant coverage about other things," but combined with his candidacy, he passes WP:GNG. (i.e. neither his candidacy or his earlier work would make him notable alone, but together they do). --Enos733 (talk) 16:52, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Everything I can see is passing mention. Maybe he has a lot of passing mentions and minor accomplishments, but I really don't see that ONE magic thing that makes it obvious that he passes WP:GNG.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  00:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 01:29, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />


 * Delete He fails WP:POLITICIAN and a bunch of passing mentions of the "Company spokesperson X said . . ." do not give him notability since the significant coverage is of the company, not the spokesperson. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  04:13, 23 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep as Rhododendrites. Gregkaye (talk) 22:14, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete He does not pass notability. Low level doctor and politician.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:19, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per the significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. See this articleWebCite (titled "Democrat Joe Avellone's campaign for governor endorsed by five Norfolk County officials") from The Republican, this articleWebCite (titled "Democrat Joseph Avellone 'not your average Joe'") from The Enterprise, and this articleWebCite (titled "Joseph Avellone, a Democratic candidate for governor, has Central Mass. tie") from Telegram & Gazette, this articleWebCite (titled "Mass. Governor Hopeful Avellone Banking On Business Experience") and this articleWebCite (titled "2 candidates, Juliette Kayyem and Joseph Avellone, miss cut for governor at Democratic convention") from the Associated Press, this articleWebCite (titled "Gov. candidate Joseph Avellone lays out 3-point jobs plan") from The Herald News, and this articleWebCite (titled "Avellone: Lowell a model for helping at-risk youths") from The Sun. There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Port Place Shopping Centre to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 06:59, 4 July 2014 (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.