Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kubosh


 * 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. As NPOL doesn't assume notability for city councillors, the applicable standard for this article is whether the subject has enough media coverage to support an article, per the GNG. The consensus here is that the coverage is all either too local, or not reliable/independent enough to meet that standard. The size of the city in question is irrelevant in establishing whether the coverage is significant enough to establish notability. – bradv  🍁  06:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Michael Kubosh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to meet WP:NPOL, and I could not find any significant coverage from media sources not in Houston, TX. Ahecht (TALK PAGE ) 21:49, 9 March 2020 (UTC) PAGE ]]) 21:49, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Ahecht ([[User talk:Ahecht|TALK
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC) *


 * Keep per WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:NPOL. Houston being the 4th largest cities in the U.S. and a prominent international city should allow for municipal councilors to have their own articles. The 3 bigger cities above it LA, New York, and Chicago all their city councilors have articles. Theres even smaller cities like San Diego, San Francisco, Boston, etc. that's councilors have articles. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 22:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete unless somebody can significantly improve the sourcing. Even in major cities where the city councillors are eligible for consideration under WP:NPOL #2, they still aren't entitled to park their notability on primary sources or blogs — a city councillor gets an article when he or she can show enough media coverage to pass WP:GNG, not just because he or she has a "staff" profile on the city council's own self-published website about itself. It's real coverage in real media or bust, even in Los Angeles and New York City and Chicago. Bearcat (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * what about WP:NEXIST and WP:ARTN? If you go look at articles for city councilors of other major cities the content and sourcing is just as bad or worse. For example, Vivian Moreno and Michael Scott Jr.. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 19:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You were the article creator. You don't get to use the garbage sources to start the article, and only start showing acceptable sources in the AFD discussion after the article gets challenged — if you want the article to exist, then it's your job to use the good sources from the start, not anybody else's job to do your homework for you. Bearcat (talk) 21:23, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right that I personally should have started the article on a better note using better references, but that's beyond the point. This article should not be deleted because the subject is notable and there is significant coverage. Can you at least agree to keep under the WP:ARTN and WP:NEXIST policies? I started the article planning to improve it and hoping that other Wikipedians would also improve it, isn't that what Wikipedia is all about?Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 22:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

PAGE ]]) 01:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC) PAGE ]]) 14:20, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - here are some WP:NEXIST sources that prove significant coverage and notability.     Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's break those down:
 * TexasGOPVote is local coverage, non-notable, and non-independent
 * KHOU is a local Houston station, and the article is not significant coverage. The article is about Marcel McClinton and only makes a passing reference to Kubosh.
 * Houston Press is a local paper with a circulation of under 50,000
 * Houston Chronicle is local, and that is an opinion piece
 * News4SanAntonio isn't exactly local (although it's less than 200 miles away and in the same state), but it's not significant coverage. The article is about Marcel McClinton and only makes a passing reference to Kubosh.
 * Bay Area Houston is local, and it's a wordpress blog, not a reliable source.
 * OutSmart is local ("a monthly publication serving Houston's LGBT community"), and it's not significant coverage of Kubosh (he's just mentioned in one sentence and has a single quote in the article).
 * Fox 26 Houston is local.
 * None of these qualify as national or international press coverage, beyond the scope of what would ordinarily be expected for their role. --Ahecht ([[User talk:Ahecht|TALK
 * WP:POLOUTCOMES states that councilors of internationally prominent cities are notable enough to have their own articles. His role with local sources and one semi-non local source is enough alone for him to have an article. If you go look at almost every Chicago, LA, San Francisco, etc. councilor you will see that almost none have national or international sources. However, the reason they aren't deleted is because they are councilor of prominent international cities. The quote you gave above national or international press coverage, beyond the scope of what would ordinarily be expected for their role is only meant for politicians thats office would not ordinarily be considered notable. Kubosh's office is considered to be notable under POLOUTCOMES; therefore, international or national press coverage is not a requirement. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 05:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:POLOUTCOMES never states that councilors of prominent cities are notable, it just says that precedent has tended to favor keeping members. Using a statement like that to infer notability is circular reasoning. Read the top of that page: This page is not a policy or guideline, and previous outcomes do not bind future ones . . . Notability always requires verifiable evidence, and all articles on all subjects are kept or deleted on the basis of sources showing their notability, not their subjective importance or relationship to something else. It goes on to say Avoid over-reliance on citing these "common outcomes" when stating one's case at Articles for Deletion. While precedents can be useful in helping to resolve notability challenges, editors are not necessarily bound to follow past practice. When push comes to shove, notability is demonstrated by the mustering of evidence that an article topic is the subject of multiple instances of non-trivial coverage in trustworthy independent sources. The semi-non-local source is the definition of trivial coverage, as it's a passing reference in an article about someone else. --Ahecht ([[User talk:Ahecht|TALK
 * Kubsosh has multiple independent sources, they may not be national or international, but they are secondary sources. WP:NPOL (the actual guideline) never states that he needs international or national sources. We should stick withe the precent on this because Houston is a very prominent international city. This article would have been an easy keep if you replaced every instance of "Houston" with "Chicago" even when the 2 cities are pretty much the same in prominance. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete none of the sources presented are the type of outside news coverage forcused on Kubosh we would need to show him as notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:20, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not every single source about him there are more WP:NEXIST sources. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 18:29, 12 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete when challenged, article creator is not able to name any significant coverage in national and international sources beyond the expected. But they do name a whole list of sources that don't help. I'm not finding anything either. Nothing presented here is an indication of notability. buidhe 12:59, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * There are plenty of local sources from the Houston area covering Kubosh. International or national sources shouldn't be required for council members of prominent cities like Houston. Kubosh literally is a representative for over 2 million people (he's an al-large member). The quantity and quality of sources on Kubosh are on par with all other council members of internationally prominent cities bigger and smaller than Houston. The best thing to do especially in this case is stick with precedent. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 02:05, 18 March 2020 (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.