Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Ciano


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  Bob herry  talk  16:56, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Richard Ciano

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a political strategist with no strong claim to passing WP:NPOL. Wikipedia does not grant an automatic presumption of notability to presidents of political parties' internal organizational structures at the provincial/state level, so his ability to qualify for an article on Wikipedia rests entirely on being able to source the article over WP:GNG — but after all the deadlinked and primary sources were stripped here, there was only one reliable source left, and one source doesn't even begin to cut it as a GNG pass. Furthermore, the article was created by User:Rciano himself, at a time when he had even less of a notability claim than this — meaning that this was also a WP:COI violation, which really should have been an instant WP:CSD if it had been caught at the time. No prejudice against recreation in the future if solid sources supporting a substantive claim of notability can be provided, but this version is a delete. Bearcat (talk) 08:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  15:20, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:57, 2 February 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 10:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep if other sources can be found. A number of Canadian readers may have an interest in Mr. Ciano. Billy Hathorn (talk) 04:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I've already done the research necessary to determine that there isn't enough coverage in reliable sources that's substantively about him to salvage this with. Bearcat (talk) 01:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep as satisfying WP:BASIC. Additional reliable sources with significant coverage include, and . Also, please don't remove deadlinks to newspaper sources per WP:KDL. The Globe and Mail one you deleted was resolved to the Star article I've linked above via the Wayback machine.  24.151.10.165 (talk) 20:05, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * None of those constitute substantive coverage in which Ciano is the subject; all of them merely namecheck his existence while not being about him in any meaningful or non-trivial way. That is not the kind of coverage it takes to satisfy WP:BASIC — we require coverage in which Ciano himself is covered in depth as a topic in his own right, not coverage of other topics which merely happens to glancingly namecheck Ciano's existence. Bearcat (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2015 (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.