Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Chiarelli


 * 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 per current guidelines. Any other discussion regarding inherent notability can be done at other venues. (non-admin closure) Rollidan (talk) 19:43, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Rick Chiarelli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

It is my understanding that being a local councilor is not, by itself, sufficient to warrant an article. Until very recently, there seems to be no substantial coverage of him, beyond a standard brief profile related to an election. There's obviously a bunch of recent coverage, but this is more of a single local news story. It's worthy of inclusion if we keep the article,but I don't think an article consisting of just this is worthy. Rob (talk) 15:12, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:32, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:32, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * For Canada at least, major city councillors all have articles. Category:Ottawa_city_councillors, Category:Toronto_city_councillors, Category:Vancouver_city_councillors etc. - SimonP (talk) 17:46, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. We've had this debate before, and Ottawa city councillors have passed the notability test. -- Earl Andrew - talk 20:38, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. As per Earl Andrew, a city councillor of a major city meets notability requirements. Jiffles1 (talk) 21:21, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article does need improvement, but city councillors in global cities are accepted as being inherently more notable than usual for most city councillors because of their city's more globalized level of importance, and consensus has always accepted Ottawa as one of the cities that practice applies to. (See also: Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington DC, London, etc.) If you'd like to shoot for a new consensus that Ottawa should be removed from that list, then you're certainly allowed to try — there have been other cities where we used to accept city councillors as notable, and then withdrew that status later on — but you would need to do that by proposing a centralized discussion on a Wikipedia discussion board about whether Ottawa should retain its "city councillors are notable" status, not by proposing that one city councillor be treated differently than others while the existing consensus otherwise still stands. And until such time as a new consensus is established to deprecate Ottawa's status as a "city councillors are notable" city, the existing consensus still applies in the interim. Bearcat (talk) 21:36, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. As per the above, a city Councillor meets notability. --SalmanZ (talk) 22:24, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Not appropriate to delete this entry. Subject is currently making national news headlines as a politician in a sex scandal (requiring female staff to wear sexy clothing). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.83.166.251 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment - Ok, obviously I was mistaken, and didn't realize the current rules.  Hopefully an admin can close this early, since it's pretty overwhelming keep.  --Rob (talk) 13:07, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I am leery about saying that councilmembers in any city would be "inherently notable." However, I like how Bearcat phrased it, that in certain cities, a councilmember is being "inherently more notable" than usual. I do think that for any councilmember WP:GNG applies and the sourcing should be more than "they exist." I have no problem or concern with the article being questioned about whether the subject should be deleted according to our existing policies and guidelines. --Enos733 (talk) 00:24, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Per everyone above.4meter4 (talk) 03:35, 3 October 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.