Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Bastiaan


 * 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. Editors can disagree, in good faith, as to the precise levels of coverage sufficient to overcome our notability bar. (non-admin closure) &#x222F; WBG converse 10:44, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Marcus Bastiaan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Stumbled across this article from WP:BLPN here. Subject has never held notable public office. Meatsgains (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Thanks,L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  02:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Thanks,L3X1  ◊distænt write◊  02:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Prominent conservative political powerbroker in the state of Victoria, comfortably passes WP:GNG (see Google News). (I'm the one who posted it to WP:BLPN because it needed some assistance enforcing BLP from political opponents, but that was a situation for cleanup, not deletion.) The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 02:34, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm right with The Drover&#39;s Wife here. The article has had quite a few problems, but with the help of some independent editors has become much improved in the past 24 hours. The subject is a significant and influential player in state politics, with somewhat unusual and extreme tactics, and gets plenty of media coverage. HiLo48 (talk) 03:16, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Has not held public office of any sort, internal political offices are not notable. The allegations of entryism are interesting and perhaps significant, but I think as a subject of coverage Bastiaan had certainly had some, but again it's more about the political machinations rather than the individual. Shritwod (talk) 07:36, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. That is not a rationale for deletion. Passes WP:GNG with flying colours. Frickeg (talk) 10:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete He fails any presumption with WP:NPOL as he's never held elective office, so we must go to WP:GNG and he clearly fails that too. A simple Google News search isn't enough to determine WP:GNG, as there's plenty of WP:MILL political reporting where he only gets name dropped, and it's borne out by the sources in the article: there is only one article about him at all and it's about how he's tipped to succeed someone as a leader of a state political party. No other sources are directly about him. May be notable enough in the future, but fails WP:GNG at the moment. SportingFlyer  talk  16:05, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * "Only one article about him at all" is nonsense: even if you exclude all the substantive coverage of his political work and only accept profile pieces, there's still a good bit more than that. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I've just performed a Google News search of him and there's not even a single article where his name is in the headline. I see a Sydney Morning Herald video on him, but again he clearly fails WP:NPOL and even though he's received a lot of mentions in local newspapers, at the end of the day he's someone who has never been elected to office, has never held party leadership, and has a bunch of name-drops in local articles. SportingFlyer  talk  04:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * "Local coverage" is massively misleading - these are some of the highest circulation newspapers in Australia, and the coverage in them is a hell of a lot more than passing references or name drops - it is detailed coverage (and a lot of it) of Bastiaan's various machinations, on top of multiple profiles of him personally. "Never been elected to office" and "has never held party leadership" are not, in fact, arguments for deletion. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 05:03, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * No, but since he's a politician, he require "significant press coverage" per WP:NPOL. With only one article and one video directly on him that I can find, this is not even close to being met. At present, he's simply someone who isn't even in charge of his local state party (yet?). Not to make an otherstuffdoesntexist argument, but a quick search shows the party currently in charge of the state, the Labour Party, doesn't even have an article for their president, much less someone who doesn't apparently hold formal power? I would assume the level of local coverage would be similar in this instance. SportingFlyer  talk  05:59, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * "One article" is absolute nonsense. He has multiple individual profile pieces and hundreds of articles about his political machinations. We determine notability on significant press coverage - "isn't even in charge of his local state party" is also not an argument for deletion. The president of the governing Labor Party, Hutch Hussein, has 35 Google news hits - several times less than Bastiaan, and considerably more trivial coverage than the substantive articles about Bastiaan, so your assumptions would be wrong in this instance. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 06:08, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Where are the multiple reliable individual profile pieces? I understand local politics gets a lot of coverage in Australia - but just being mentioned in local political articles does not on its own allow a politician who has never held office to pass WP:GNG. This feels similar to me to the recent Zara Kitson AfD - lots of little mentions across Scottish political articles, but not notable on her own. SportingFlyer  talk  14:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * There's a problem with the language you're using there SportingFlyer. This is not about "local politics". In Australia that term refers to municipal council elections and the politics surrounding them. Outside the really big cities, I'd agree with an absence of notability there. This is about state level politics in Australia's second most populous state, and about one of the two major parties nation wide. (In fact, the party that is in power nationally, and which only lost the most recent state election by a whisker.) Bastiaan's machinations will impact candidate pre-selections for next federal election. We're really talking national politics here. HiLo48 (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm defining local politics as non-national politics. Being the vice-president of a state party requires significant coverage, and while I think he's close to significant coverage, there's only about two or three articles at most which talk about him significantly, and one of them is a blog/unreliable source. SportingFlyer  talk  00:57, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Just like Humpty Dumpty, you can use whatever definition you like, but my comment was just a tip for you in an environment where you're talking to a lot of people who will automatically use a different definition, and potentially misunderstand you. HiLo48 (talk) 01:31, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:GNG per others, extensive coverage in mainstream media. Does need improvement though. Counterparts in other parties and states don't warrant their own pages because they aren't as notable. Onetwothreeip (talk) 11:06, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Michael Kroger has a page dedicated to him and he has not held public office. No one has nominated that page for deletion.
 * Comment president of a major party in a state and a director of ABC would seem to lend themselves more to notability, as a comparison. Shritwod (talk) 12:27, 31 July 2018 (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.