Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mitchell Schwartz (public figure)


 * 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. A number of comments focused on Schwartz's role as director of Obama's California campaign - some asserting this was notable, others asserting this was not notable. We don't appear to have a guideline on that particular role, and even when we do we rely on what reliable sources say. So a guideline saying such a role is notable would be indicating that there would likely be reliable sources discussing that role. And there are. These reliable sources have been found and detailed in the discussion. However, it has been pointed out that all relate to the same press release, and while we may use press releases judiciously for information, we tend not to rely on them for deciding notability. As indicated in the discussion, per WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:BIO1E, notability has not been met. Arguments for notability are not as strong as though against, and those against match most closely our policies and guidelines. The article says "widely known for his work as the California State Director for Barack Obama's 2008 presidential campaign", so - again per WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:BIO1E - a suggestion may be to include him in Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008, and to build on his mention in Los Angeles mayoral election, 2017. Those appear to be the articles where information on him would be most useful.  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  11:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Mitchell Schwartz (public figure)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this article is not notable. Running for office by itself does not qualify for notability. The references do not indicate significant third-party notability except related to the election, and a search for references does not find any more. On the contrary, this article says, "if you vote in Los Angeles elections, you have almost certainly never heard of" Schwartz.http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2016/01/democratic_operative_says.php He is not even that notable in this election, as this article describes "long shot Schwartz" by saying he "has as much chance of being your next mayor as I do of winning a Pulitzer Prize for Poetry."http://www.ladowntownnews.com/news/more-election-fundraising-fun/article_dddc5746-925f-11e6-b755-9b25e6982ad6.html

This WP article reads like a campaign piece, stating Schwartz policies as fact and giving Schwartz' criticism of his main opponent as if it were fact. While these WP:NPOV problems could be fixed, it is not worth doing so given the lack of notability. The creator of this article, who also provided most of the edits and most of the content, worked in the Mitchell Schwartz for Mayor campaign and was responsible for the "grassroots social media outreach campaign" that appears to include creation of this page. This creates serious concerns about WP:COI if not WP:AUTO.

COI Notice: I am a Los Angeles political activist. Schwartz' main opponent is Garcetti. I have met Garcetti many times. There has been a past election in which I have supported Garcetti. There has been a past election in which I have opposed Garcetti. I have not decided who I will support in this election. While I was typing this message for the talk page, I got a call from Garcetti's office asking about the procedure for getting an endorsement from an organization I lead. I have not been in touch yet with the Schwartz campaign. RichardMathews (talk) 18:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Keep Him being the California in charge of President Obama's presidential campaign should be taken into consideration. I think it fulfills WP:GNG...Rameshnta909 (talk) 18:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Per above, passes WP:GNG. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 20:33, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Outside of press releases, the media does not seem to have found it noteworthy that Schwartz had the Obama campaign job. Before he ran for office, I can find just two independent references about what he did in that job. If he truly is notable for this (and I don't think so), the bulk of the article should be about what he did in that job, provided any such material can be found without doing independent research. RichardMathews (talk) 19:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete being a state director of a US presidential campaign is not enough to make someone notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:08, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 18:45, 6 December 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - being the director of the largest state campaign is probably notable. Bearian (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - being the director of the largest state campaign is probably not notable.--2600:8805:A001:C900:38D9:8760:3AF7:F734 (talk) 16:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Schwartz' role in the Obama campaign and his connections and networking make him the only candidate in this race with any remote chance of winning it, even if it's a slim one. And even if/when Garcetti wins reelection, it'll be worth knowing what kind of opposition he ran against. Frankly I'm surprised this is even up for debate here. We're talking about one of the largest cities in the world and an ambitious, upwardly mobile incumbent. 23.240.213.65 (talk) 17:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment What makes you notable is recognition from third parties (WP:NRV), not a job you hold or a campaign you are in (WP:POLITICIAN). If being a candidate cannot by itself make you notable, how can being an employee of a candidate do so? The notability rules explicitly make the current campaign for mayor not a factor. If it were a factor, the facts are that his opponent has an order of magnitude more money and that news media have been clear in saying Schwartz is an unknown and a long shot. For the Obama campaign, he was director of the campaign in the largest state, not the director of the largest campaign of any state. The big campaigns are in the medium-sized swing states (as measured by Obama's 2007/2008 ad spending, the California campaign was the 15th largest with the PA campaign being seven times larger). The fact that there was just one media interview with Schwartz while he had that job shows that it was not notable. I am still convinced that this should be deleted and will be until someone shows there is "objective evidence that the subject has received significant attention from independent sources." RichardMathews (talk) 19:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment By your logic, only Eric Garcetti would meet your notability requirements. He'll get a significant share of the vote. He'll get endorsements once local politicians are done reeling from the national election. But he's absolutely notable now, too, because he's worked within the party and has connections. Honestly, Wikipedia is dumb. You'll create 50+ pages of Game of Thrones bullshit but when the second largest city in America has a mayoral election, you bring in the demolition crew. 76.91.51.209 (talk) 04:34, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per RichardMathews. Just because he was campaign director in the biggest state, does not mean he made a bigger impact on the election compared to other state campaign directors. The Democratic candidate has usually won California in recent elections. Obama's campaign spent more in New Hampshire and it's way "smaller" (population less than a million). A campaign director there would be closer to being notable. Anyways, the current sources are weak. Emily Goldstein (talk) 12:18, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 12:35, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:01, 23 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Politicians are one of the only groups of biographies for whom notability standards are actually raised above GNG by a Special Notability Guideline. In short, we expect politicians to be actually elected to a high office, not to merely run for them, and consider ordinary campaign biographical and position articles in newspapers to fall under the umbrella of WP:NOTNEWS and to not count to GNG. We're trying to avoid self-serving campaign biographies by active politicians running for office. That's precisely what we have here. Carrite (talk) 15:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, the coverage of this person is routine and local, so I don't see that he'd meet the WP:GNG. He may possibly become more notable in the future, at which time this article can be recreated.  Note that the "Keep" opinions above are limited to bare assertions of WP:ITSNOTABLE as well as crystal ball stuff.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 01:19, 29 December 2016 (UTC).

Keep per the significant coverage in reliable sources.  The article notes: "The person who directed the Comeback Kid's 1992 New Hampshire campaign, Mitchell Schwartz, has joined Sen. Barack Obama's team. Longtime Los Angeles Democratic operative Mitchell Schwartz has jumped on the Obama train. The founder of the Bombay Company public relations firm, which coordinated the online media campaign for former Vice President Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, Schwartz will serve as California State Director for Barack Obama's presidential campaign. ... Schwartz has worked on nearly every presidential campaign since 1984, and served in 1992 as Bill Clinton's New Hampshire state director. He also served on campaigns for Sen. Barbara Boxer, former Gov. Gray Davis and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villraigosa."  The article notes: "Mitchell Schwartz, a veteran of Bill Clinton, Barbara Boxer, Gray Davis and Antonio Villaraigosa campaigns, is state director of the Barack Obama campaign. Schwartz is also president of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters. ... Mitchell Schwartz, a veteran strategist, has served on nearly every presidential campaign since 1984. As Bill Clinton's New Hampshire State Director in 1992, Schwartz played a key role in Clinton's 'comeback kid' showing in that state's Democratic primary. Schwartz served in the Department of State's Office of Public Affairs under President Clinton in 1993-95. Currently President of the Bomaye Company, a public affairs firm in Los Angeles, Schwartz has served in the campaigns of Senator Barbara Boxer, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Governor Gray Davis and other elected officials. Schwartz is President of the Board of the Los Angeles League of Conservation Voters and is a board member of Temple Israel of Hollywood. He lives in Los Angeles with his wife and two children."  The article notes: "Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is staffing up in California, naming veteran Democratic campaign strategist Mitchell Schwartz to be his state director. Schwartz has worked on the campaigns of U.S. Sen. Barbara Boxer, former Gov. Gray Davis and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. He was New Hampshire state director for Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign and then worked in the State Department's Office of Public Affairs from 1993 to 1995. He is founder and president of Bomaye Group, a Los Angeles public affair firm which, among other things, coordinated the grassroots and online campaign for Al Gore's movie, 'An Inconvenient Truth.'"  The article notes: "Schwartz is a longtime political operative who ran then-Gov. Bill Clinton’s primary campaign in New Hampshire in 1992 and then-candidate Barack Obama’s California campaign in 2008. He also served as communications director at the U.S. State Department during Clinton’s first term and worked with the LADWP on the Green Power Programs from 1999-2003." <li> The article notes: "A political strategist for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign filed fundraising papers with the city of Los Angeles this week, the first step in a mayoral bid. Mitchell Schwartz, 55, said he will challenge Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti in next year’s election. The Windsor Square resident said he’s concerned about quality-of-life issues, and cited crime, traffic and eduction as his key campaign issues. Schwartz, 55, also criticized development, stating City Hall leaders are too beholden to developers."</li> <li> The article notes: "A longtime Democratic operative who played important roles in the first Obama presidential campaign and the Clinton White House said Tuesday that he plans to run against Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti in 2017. Mitchell Schwartz, 55, said he plans to take out papers for his campaign in the coming weeks. A political strategist who directed Barack Obama’s 2008 campaign in California and served as communications director for the State Department under President Clinton, Schwartz would be the first challenger with a significant political resume to enter the 2017 mayoral race. ... In 2009, Schwartz was involved in the unsuccessful campaign for L.A.’s Measure B, a ballot initiative that would have expanded the development of solar-energy panels in the city. Measure B was also backed by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, which represents most employees at the city’s Department of Water and Power."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Mitchell Schwartz to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 08:08, 30 December 2016 (UTC) </li></ul>
 * Each of #1, #2, and #3 is a brief note that contains no information on Schwartz that was not included in just one Obama press release. That press release is clearly not independent of Schwartz. So little thought was put into #1 that they didn't even correctly copy spelling from the press release (Bomaye versus Bombay)—at least it wasn't a copy/paste job. In #2, Schwartz is just one of a list of people covered. None of these three sources is substantial or independent. None shows ongoing interest in the job the Schwartz did. Fails WP:BASIC (especially note 5) and WP:BLP1E.


 * The same reporter who summarized the press release for #2 actually tells you how notable Schwartz is in a more recent article. The headline is "Mitchell Schwartz (who?) says he'll run against Garcetti" (emphasis added). The second paragraph says, "you have almost certainly never heard of" Schwartz.


 * Each of #4, #5, and #6 is news about the current election campaign. Fails WP:NOTNEWS, WP:POLITICIAN, and the fourth bullet of WP:POLOUTCOMES.


 * The comment that Currite made about politicians needing to overcome a higher standard under a special notability guideline is very important here. It is not good enough to be a candidate. It is not good enough to be an employee of a candidate. You actually have to do something that builds lasting interest beyond a campaign.


 * RichardMathews (talk) 10:47, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I think it is time that I update my COI notice from when I originally posted this AfD over a month ago. As noted before, I lead some local political organizations interested in doing an endorsement in this race. Since then, one of these groups voted unanimously and without debate to endorse the incumbent and not Schwartz. I did not vote. I have not personally endorsed in this race, but it will eventually be my responsibility to promote the club's endorsement. For another organization, in about a month I will be helping conduct interviews of candidates in this race including Schwartz. I am not paid for this or any other political work. I am not associated with any current campaign. My political duties in no way affect my belief that Schwartz is not notable. I really don't know enough about Schwartz yet to have formed an opinion of him as a potential mayor. RichardMathews (talk) 11:05, 30 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - not seeing the type of in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources necessary to meet WP:GNG, and he definitely doesn't meet WP:NPOL.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 20:08, 30 December 2016 (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.