Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Tilsley


 * 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 keep. Deor (talk) 17:10, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Paul Tilsley

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Local councillors fail to meet WP:NPOL and are routinely deleted. Neither being a Lord Mayor or having an MBE a CBE get you notability either. Fails WP:GNG. Bondegezou (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bondegezou (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bondegezou (talk) 15:18, 16 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep He has a CBE which grants notability as per the evidence I set here., you wouldn't mind withdrawing that, would you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miraclepine (talk • contribs) 15:35, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You are right that he has a CBE as well. Apologies for misstating that above. However, the closing statement of the AfD to which you link noted that "This close does not decide whether [...] being awarded a CBE (as opposed to an MBE or OBE), [is] sufficient to confer encyclopedic notability". There is no consensus that CBE gets you automatic notability. Bondegezou (talk) 15:45, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * But he was a deputy leader of an even more prominent city council and it was also stated that it is a permissible basis of finding notability to find that both factors contribute substantially to reach such a conclusion in combination. ミラP 16:20, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it can be taken into consideration. Of course. That keep decision concerned the leader of the council. Tilsley was the deputy leader of a council. Bondegezou (talk) 16:27, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Globalization and World Cities Research Network lists Birmingham as a Beta- global city, two levels higher than Leeds, which should also be taken into consideration. ミラP 16:33, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not aware of anyone other than yourself feeling that what the Globalization and World Cities Research Network says has any particular relevance to how to interpret WP:NPOL...? Bondegezou (talk) 11:34, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Guess what - a single person closing a TfD does not get to decide that "being awarded a CBE [is not] sufficient to confer encyclopedic notability". Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * They don't, no. That is up to the community. However, there is no consensus on Wikipedia that I can see that a CBE does confer notability. If I've missed something, please let me know. As far as I can see, the matter has been discussed on a number of occasions and some people think a CBE should confer notability and others don't, but we've never collectively reached a conclusion. I note that the vast majority of people with CBEs don't have Wikipedia articles. Bondegezou (talk) 11:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Good grief. Both Lord Mayor of Birmingham and CBE offer notability. He was also deputy leader in a coalition, making him effectively the joint leader. Keep. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note also how . It's quite clear that WP:BEFORE was not done, or he would have found citations for most of that material. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:08, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Most of the unsourced contribs were actually from a person with the name "Paultilsley", implying WP:COI issues. ミラP 01:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * We have had multiple discussions recently that have all agreed that Lord Mayor, being a ceremonial post that just rotates between councillors, confers very little notability in itself. A CBE is, yes, of some note. The question is whether it's enough.
 * Deputy leader in a coalition is not the same as joint leader. It depends on the relative strengths of the parties how much actual power there is. In the absence of a reliable source saying that Tilsley's role was effectively that of joint leader, we cannot assume that.
 * There was a lot of material in the article with no citations supporting it. It had been like that for over 5 years. I removed it. It remains a basic tenet of Wikipedia that material without support can be removed. Bondegezou (talk) 11:21, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Deputy leader in this coalition, was effectively the joint leader. As I said, WP:BEFORE was not done. I note that you do not claim otherwise. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * They were, nonetheless, both accurate and sourceable in the main. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, Andy. I don't know what you were trying to do with my mark-up...? It seemed fine to me as it was -- why did you change it? Anyway, on to the article: I did not see good material to support this article existing. Local politicians always get plenty of mentions in local media, but this is generally WP:ROUTINE coverage. I didn't see significant coverage of the individual in the national media that would meet WP:GNG. If you've got some, let's see it.
 * If you have a reliable source saying that deputy leader in this coalition was effectively the joint leader, then that would be pertinent information.
 * I did not go through the material I deleted in detail trying to source each line. When a large amount of unsourced text has been added, by probably Mr Tilsley himself, it is simpler just to chop it. I don't believe I have to defend following WP:V and WP:BLP to you. By all means, feel free to restore with sources added. Bondegezou (talk) 17:50, 17 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. We have always regarded a CBE and above as meeting the criteria of WP:ANYBIO #1 at AfD. Not one has ever been deleted as far as I remember (and I remember quite a number being nominated in the past). That is a clear consensus. It would be nice if this was taken on board and these nominations ceased. They're a waste of time. I've started this list to illustrate the consensus. I have omitted nobody I have found in a search thus far. All have been kept. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:32, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for compiling that list. In most of them, the conclusion is not "has CBE so notable", although one has a close saying that. In most of them, the keep decision (and there's at least one "no consensus" decision in there too) is stated as being for other reasons (a higher order received, sources added etc.). Most of the !votes in the discussions don't talk about the CBE, but about other issues. And, as I've said before, the vast majority of people awarded CBEs do not have articles. This does not suggest to me that the consensus is as clear as you are arguing. Bondegezou (talk) 12:13, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * My point is that no people with CBEs have been deleted. And contrary to your statement, many people in those AfDs have opined that the honour makes them notable. The closer has naturally taken that into consideration, even if it's not explicitly stated in the closing statement (it's not the closer's job to state that someone is notable because they have a CBE - that's the job of the contributors; otherwise it would be a supervote). As to most not having articles. So what? Wikipedia is a perennial work in progress. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:07, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The list is now complete. And speaks for itself. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:47, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There appears to be cases not on that list, like Articles for deletion/Brigadier General Edward Morton CBE (deleted), and I note that there are articles in your list that were deleted, as well as those that were merged or where the result was no consensus. So some people with CBEs have been deleted. Bondegezou (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The delete was on grounds related to WP:V. ミラP 17:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Exactly. It's likely that was a hoax, so I didn't bother listing it. The three that were deleted were all in 2007 (before consensus had been established on Wikipedia) and all created by the same person who seemed to be creating a raft of genealogical articles. In fact, these should not have been deleted by our modern standards, both because of their honours and because all three were general officers and therefore meet WP:SOLDIER. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:33, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * For example, look at Articles for deletion/Doug Lewis (Royal Navy officer) as an AfD from August that was closed with no consensus. There is plenty of discussion there to the effect that CBE is not an automatic pass of ANYBIO, contrary to your claim that it is. Bondegezou (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * However, the article was not deleted. Other than the three in 2007, no article about someone with a CBE or higher has been deleted. I'm really not sure why you're so determined to argue against this. We have articles on people who had a minor pop hit or played a single professional football match or served a few months in a legislature (all pretty much automatically kept under notability guidelines), yet you want to delete articles on people who have achieved so much that they have been recognised with a high honour by their country (and also meet a notability guideline). -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:37, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * In Articles for deletion/John Michael Owen Snodgrass, you argued the person had an honour higher than a CBE and they were still deleted. Bondegezou (talk) 16:56, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * It was overturned to no consensus here. ミラP 17:50, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. As the closer ignored the honours arguments and focused only on the arguments relating to diplomats not being notable, which they gave undue weight to. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:40, 23 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep So: I think a CBE is covered by WP:ANYBIO as generally indicating notability. It doesn't (and shouldn't) guarantee inclusion, but it's a strong marker of notability, and if there's enough RS coverage of somebody to write an article about them, and they have a CBE, then they should probably be included in the encyclopedia. Ralbegen (talk) 14:04, 22 December 2019 (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.