Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noah Evanchuk


 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Noah Evanchuk

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Yet another unelected Canadian MP candidate in the current election (will this ever stop?), still with no properly sourced indication of notability per WP:POLITICIAN. As usual, he's certainly entitled to come back if he wins, but not to use Wikipedia as a campaign tool in the meantime. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 07:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as he fails WP:POLITICIAN and no other credible claim to notability is made. This current wave will end, Bearcat, when these Canadian elections are done, but there will be more waves to come.  We need to be vigilant in enforcing our consensus here, or we will be flooded by promotional articles about unelected politicians. Cullen328 (talk) 22:16, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, as while he may be a candidate for Parliament in the current election, the article as I wrote it notes that he held province-wide office for the NDP, and the riding he is contesting is considered to be a swing district. Furthermore, I am in the process of adding references which note outside notability beyond his current status as a candidate for office. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rnyr (talk • contribs) 22:26, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I hope he does win the seat, actually (Ray Boughen, bah humbug), and if he does I'm the guy who usually creates our initial stubs on newly-elected MPs/MLAs anyway — but that's beside the point. The fact that somebody might win the seat they're running for does not, in and of itself, meet our inclusion rules as spelled out at WP:POLITICIAN — and neither does holding a position in a provincial political party's internal structure. (AFD just killed an article about the president of the Alberta Liberal Party less than two weeks ago.) The baseline for a politician's inclusion in Wikipedia is that the person has actually held an elected public office of some type, not the fact that they might win one in the future. Bearcat (talk) 01:28, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm told that he was an elected provincial councillor; I take it that wouldn't qualify? I'm currently searching for outside proof of that. Otherwise, I fully understand why this article would qualify under AFD. Rnyr (talk) 02:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as things stand. A politician does not need to win an election to be notable.  However, if they haven't been elected (to at least prov level), they need to qualify under WP:GNG like anybody else.  I see a lot of passing mentions of him.  But, there's nothing substantial and independent that focuses on him.  I object to the improper synthesis of sources here.  A couple articles mentioned him, barely, as a lawyer in specific cases.  That was spun into to a more general statement of working at "all levels" of court, as though that's something special (I'm guessing there's not that many levels in the province anyhow).  Finally, as Bearcat mentioned, being president of a provincial party isn't adequate for inclusion, so being an executive on a youth group in a party, clearly doesn't cut it.  --Rob (talk) 01:20, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:POLITICIAN. Without prejudice to re-creation if he should win the seat he's running for.   PK  T (alk)  00:06, 10 April 2011 (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.