Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Ellison in the 83rd Minnesota Legislative Session


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;   &spades;  04:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Keith Ellison in the 83rd Minnesota Legislative Session

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Do we really need an article entirely about one man's work during one session of a U.S. state legislature? This is close to being a campaign ad for this gentleman. Hemlock Martinis 07:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * delete this amounts to straight-forward political advertising. He already has a rather overlong page at Keith Ellison (politician) which needs some pruning. I have marked it COI.DGG 08:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * comment this article was made in attempt to give depth of information to a Wikipedia subject. One of the largest criticisms against Wikipedia is its lack of depth. I understand that this is probably a losing arguement, and that active controversial politicians will be lucky to get a single page, while every episode of the Simpsons and South Park and every character within them will have massive amounts of information and multiple sub-pages given to them.
 * With the above in mind, I vote keep.--Wowaconia 09:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It's not about volume of information - I do have a big crush on abundant information about political figures - it's about volume of articles. If the information in this article is notable (and some of it is, if it could be made NPOV) it should go on Ellison's page.  Delete.Sarcasticidealist 23:02, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This does read like a campaign ad - this sort of info is better suited on that persons own website --PrincessBrat 11:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Rewrite or Delete I nominated this article for deletion shortly after it was created. The author asked me to give him a chance to develop it more. He convinced me that the article on Keith Ellison's work in the 83rd was too long to be in the Keith Ellison page. Therefore, I did not contest it, and allowed the article to be written. Unfortunately, this article may by definition display undue weight. I suggest that we get someone other than Wowaconia to attempt a rewrite. I would do it myself if I wasn't going out of town on business tonight. I'll be gone longer than this Afd will take. If you vote to rewrite, I'll take a crack at it. If it still shows undue weight then I say we delete. StayinAnon 15:52, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Keith Ellison is by definition notable, being an elected official in both a state and federal capacity, but his cumulative actions in one legislative session are not. We don't have a separate article on Franklin D. Roosevelt's term as a state senator for New York. We don't have a separate article on Nelson Rockefeller's term as Governor of New York. That's because although both did notable things as senator and governor respectively, none of those deeds are notable enough to make a separate article on their cumulative deeds necessary. Anything that can be said about Keith Ellison's actions as member of a state legislature can be included either in his own article or in the article on that legislative term (or on the action in question). -- Charlene 19:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. short summary to main Ellison article would be fine Elizmr 21:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Tt 225 17:15, 12 March 2007 (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.