Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Griffin (politician)


 * 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  00:26, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Mark Griffin (politician)

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


 * Delete non notable local politician Mayalld (talk) 15:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep there are countless lists of local politicians throughout Wikipedia with full articles of each member, why shouldn't Scottish councillors be added? Big Jim 15:04, 23 January 2009
 * Comment that is just a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, and WP:POLITICIAN is explicit that merely being elected to a local council doesn't make somebody notable Mayalld (talk) 15:08, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment but the other stuff does exist, so the standard you refer to is not being uniformly met. For example, why are many of the members of Chicago City Council deserving of entry whilst members of North Lanarkshire Council are not? Big Jim 15:11, 23 January 2009
 * Comment - That would fall under criteria 2 "received significant press coverage", which this guy doesn't seem to have. Grandmartin11 (talk) 16:11, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Not in many of their articles. Perhaps we shoudld delete 30 odd of them (seriously). MikeHobday (talk) 09:31, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * It's also covered by WP:OUTCOMES, which notes that AFD precedent has tended to favour articles about councillors of major metropolitan cities (which is not to say that even those are inherently entitled to articles, but it does show where the notability line tends to be drawn in borderline cases — and since somebody might try the "but this is near Glasgow!" argument, I should clarify that the precedent means the city council itself, not the county councils of the city's suburbs.) Ultimately, though, any local politician can have an article if said article meets WP:N and WP:RS — but there's no particularly strong evidence being shown here that this particular fellow meets that threshhold. So delete if somebody doesn't start adding real sources instead of snarking on policy. Bearcat (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no notability asserted and nothing on him that seems to meet WP:POLITICIAN. A google search shows up just one news story in a local newspaper related to routine council work which definitely doesn't qualify. Valenciano (talk) 19:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:37, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Grandmartin11 and Valenciano. twirligigLeave one! &#8900; Check me out! 21:13, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Local councillors are not notable in themselves, and no other claim to notability is presented. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 22:40, 23 January 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.