Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Jackson (political adviser)


 * 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.  Sandstein  16:26, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Richard Jackson (political adviser)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Richard Jackson doesn't meet the GNG; without substantial coverage in reliable sources. His role is not high-profile enough to justify an article by virtue of office, covering the Prime Minister's visits and media operations. Ralbegen (talk) 18:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Gabe Iglesia (talk) 19:17, 13 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. None of the refs are about him. A relatively recent article which should not have been created. Szzuk (talk) 22:13, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 00:20, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 00:20, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - he's an MBE and notable as a lwyer. Bearian (talk) 01:25, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * My understanding was that per WP:ANYBIO, honours aren't sufficient for inclusion, though they can indicate notability. Very few of people awarded MBEs in this year's NYD honours list would meet inclusion criteria. And I'm not sure how he's notable as a lawyer? It doesn't appear that he's ever practiced law... Ralbegen (talk) 09:40, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Honours are sufficient for inclusion per WP:ANYBIO, but in Britain this is accepted to include the CBE and above, two levels above the MBE. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:29, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh, OK. Changing my !vote to delete. Bearian (talk) 23:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:04, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete for failing the general-notability criteria. Notably, we have pictures of two prime ministers but can hardly locate images of the article's subject, something that, in our day and age, rather fatally undermines its notability claims. Terminate without stare decisis: There's always time in the future. -The Gnome (talk) 15:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - easily meets WP:POLITICIAN with articles by the BBC, The Times, The Guardian and The Independent. Atsme 📞📧 17:55, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * In the references in this article, the BBC reference is a caption to a seventeen-second video. I don't think that constitutes significant coverage. The Guardian lists him for his honour, which definitely isn't significant coverage. The reference to the Independent does not mention or cover Jackson at all. The Times piece is the only one that constitutes significant coverage, but it's not independent of the subject as the GNG requires. The author is Jackson's old boss, as she mentions in the article. Ralbegen (talk) 19:36, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * And the article creator was blocked as a sock, voting multiple times in this afd. Szzuk (talk) 19:52, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

strike the sock votes ?? already done ?? look only at the article to see if salvagable; WP:POLITICIAN states: Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office qualify his office handling media relations for PM and other offices he held in the past meet that requirement. Atsme 📞📧 21:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * He's not a politician and never has been. He's an adviser. Szzuk (talk) 22:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Uhm...a similar argument is over at Donald Trump. Oh, and the article under discussion here clearly states: "Jackson returned to politics as part of the 'Remain campaign’s media team.[5]" He made politics his career - and i would think he'd have to be enough of a politician to be a political consultant. You don't have to agree. Atsme 📞📧 22:37, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
 * OK - but for the purpose of the close I'll say he's never been elected to any office in the UK. Szzuk (talk) 22:46, 25 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Ralbegen's forensic work above is quite conclusive on the issue. -The Gnome (talk) 17:32, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment - Nope. Per Who's Who In Cameron's Resignation List? "Political allies and spinners, a "stylist" and the referendum campaign losers - the full list of those honoured by David Cameron." Jackson was a Member of the British Empire (MBE), honored by PM Cameron which satisfies verifiability and adds to stacking for notability. He was Head of Operations under 2 PMs, Cameron and May; a rather notable task. The Times writes about him, "Ms Perrior says her “fixer” Richard Jackson, second right, helps the PM avoid campaign pitfalls". There are other RS to stack for multiple coverage over his career - example: BBC, "Tory spokesperson complained about Mark Clarke in 2008", and Telegraph. Also see WP:GNG & WP:NNC which states:
 * ...it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.
 * ...There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Sources do not have to be available online...
 * ...The notability guidelines do not apply to contents of articles or lists (with the exception of some lists, which restrict inclusion to notable items or people). Content coverage within a given article or list (i.e. whether something is noteworthy enough to be mentioned within the article or list) is governed by the principle of due weight and other content policies.
 * He meets the requirements of both GNG and POLITICIAN. Atsme 📞📧 20:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The GNG says that a topic needs to receive significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. None of the sources presented meet those criteria - there's some trivial coverage in independent reliable sources and some significant coverage in non-independent reliable sources. So I don't see how he can pass GNG? And I don't think that his office gives him notability by WP:POLITICIAN. It's not so much national political office as working for a national politician, and there are plenty more non-notable staffers that would be covered by such an interpretation. Regardless: at the head of the additional criteria it spells out that "meeting one or more [additional criteria] does not guarantee that a subject should be included". Ralbegen (talk) 21:03, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * @Atsme Sorry but Jackson is not notable enough according to the criteria for a mixed martial artist. Yep, those criteria are about as relevant to the subject of the article as is WP:POLITICIAN. Mr Jackson is not a politician. (I've no idea if he's into karate chops.) As to the quotes from the rules you copied above: The 3rd one is irrelevant, and you omitted the important portion from another, i.e. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material (emphasis added). Perhaps significance is in the eye of the beholder. To me, this is a background actor in an ensemble play. (Should we try WP:ACTOR?) -The Gnome (talk) 13:17, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   17:21, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - I do not like voting without adding something new to the discussion but Ralbegen has covered every reason why this subject fails our notability guidelines. Difficult to honestly challenge the rationale.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:10, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: does not meet WP:ANYBIO and significant RS coverage not found. And per above discussion. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - very strong keep - clear references. He is an advisor, and line manages the director of comms, Robbie Gibb who also has a page. Clear notability through references
 * — 81.139.166.250 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * 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.