Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Hunter-Clarke (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  Sandstein  08:49, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Robin Hunter-Clarke
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was previously deleted in 2011 (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Hunter-Clarke). Was a minor local politician then; has since been a failed parliamentary candidate and become party functionary. Nothing since to indicate notability achieved. I strongly suspect self-promotion. Emeraude (talk) 14:41, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that UKIP is a party that many people JUSTDONTLIKE (I know, I JUSTDONTLIKE UKIP)  I heard of Hunter-Clarke today for the first time while going through articles at AFD.  I searched, found a lot of stuff already on the page, and it is pretty clear that the page was created by a UKIP enthusiast.  However, I do know a thing or two about politics, and everything I read seemed to flag him as something of a rising star in the UKIP, making the impression given by the Nom that this is an article an article about a "failed candidate" now reduced to a mere "party functionary" seem, well, unduly POV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 21:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 21:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist  (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 21:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:N states, "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity".  Unscintillating (talk) 01:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources available in the article show WP:GNG.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:31, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as we base these articles in WP:POLITICIAN and his current position isn't satisfying it considering he's simply the "Chief of Staff", and his other positions have been minor, and that's unsurprising. SwisterTwister   talk  03:06, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia's notability is defined at WP:N, not at WP:POLITICIAN. This shows that SNGs are co-equal with WP:GNG, such that there are alternate paths to notability.  This article is no more based on WP:POLITICIAN than it is on WP:PROF.  Unscintillating (talk) 03:25, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Wrong and absurd. What does WP:PROF have to do with anything at all? AusLondonder (talk) 00:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Young politician appropriately deleted in 2011. Now, however, his numbers at the polls (impressive, albeit not enough to win him a seat), his job coordinating UKIP participation in Vote Leave (Brexit) and, most recently, his job as UK Independence Party Chief of Staff in the National Assembly for Wales, have made him notable.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:03, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Revisiting, I can see that I was unclear. What I intended to say was that the jobs he has had and positions he has run for have "made him notable" because of the unusual amount of local, regional, and national coverage he has attracted.  Much of it substantive and including interviews and profiles that go far beyond routine.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:35, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete We require significant in-depth coverage. This individual has received a passing mention here and there in a local newspaper. AusLondonder (talk) 23:57, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * "passing mention" is defined at WP:CORP as "passing mention, such as identifying a quoted person as working for an organization." Unscintillating (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG accepts local sources. Unscintillating (talk) 03:15, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Inaccurate characterization of the news coverage; in fact, Hunter-Clarke's career has been covered both in passing and in depth by national papers (as well as by local and regional ones) beginning with coverage of his unusually young age when first elected to city council, and when first running for parliament. Coverage that has been ongoing.  Here:  for example, is a search of his name on  BBC.com.  Let's try to keep alternative facts out of these discussions.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that because the BBC sources simply serve to prove my point. The only article with him in the headline relates to his selection as a candidate for an election which he lost - that is not absolutely not acceptable sourcing per WP:NPOL. The others are purely passing trivial mentions, such as this one, on the BBC Lincolnshire local site, titled "BNP candidate Reverend Robert West told pupils Muslims 'worship devil'". This article is about some loony-tune candidate standing for the same constituency Hunter-Clarke stood for. Clarke-Hunter is mentioned at the bottom in a list of candidates. The second article produced by your search is BBC Lincolnshire Live Thursday 10 November 2016. Hunter-Clarke gets a trivial mention again "A councillor who said he would stand for UKIP in the Sleaford and North Hykeham by-election has announced he is pulling out of the contest. Robin Hunter-Clarke, who's a Lincolnshire County Councillor and works for UKIP in the Welsh Assembly, is thought to be making way for Suzanne Evans, who's also bidding to be UKIP's next leader". AusLondonder (talk) 00:35, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Your assertion was that he was covered "here and there in a local newspaper" which misleads other editors by giving the impression that you searched - or at least looked at sourcing in the article - and are describing what you found. It is an inaccurate description, since you do not even accurately describe  the sources already in the article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * As pertains to the BBC, Note that source #5 in the article is this 2003 BBC interview (on a BBC talk show).  Moreover, coverage like this  2014 BBC article ("Boston and Skegness UKIP vote: Robin Hunter-Clarke named as candidate") can hardly be dismissed as "trivial" although, of course, as with all active politicians, Hunter-Clarrk will also come up in searches where he is merely mentioned.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, scanning a news archive, I just noticed this 2012 story about an interview on BBC 1 "Skegness's youngest ever councillor talks politics on BBC Radio One's Newsbeat" . This is NOT the same as the interview I mentioned above.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Returning to your assertion that local coverage is limited to "passing mentions", Note that a quick news produces in-depth coverage such as "Robin, 21, lands one of biggest roles in UKIP" in the regional weekly, Lincolnshire Echo 2014 .  And more similar in regional and local papers "Young UKIP councillor eyes spot on national committee" (2013); "Former Boston and Skegness UKIP candidate takes up new post" (2016);  "Youngest Tory councilor jumps ship to join UKIP" (2012).  And more.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:31, 26 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Note also, this 900 word profile/interview in The Independent. "'You hear that we need to get young people involved in politics - well here I am'" (Paul Gallagher, , 13 December 2014).E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:41, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * And then there is stuff like the coverage of him in 3 paragraphs in The Times Feb. 2016 post-game analysis of why UKIP lost so badly at the polls .  Does he have a future in politics?  Does UKIP? Who knows.  My point is only that even a quick scan of the first page of a Proquest News Archive search (no single search ever finds everything)  established that his political career got more than sufficient national, regional and local coverage to pass WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * "Does he have a future in politics? ...Who knows."? Well, precisely. And when he has he gets an article, until then no. Emeraude (talk) 12:45, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTTEMPORARY.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:44, 31 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - I'm persuaded this passes GNG by a detailed profile in The Independent, a BBC article specifically about his candidacy in a Parliamentary by-election, while the range of other reliable sources, many of which provide brief mentions or are very local publications, are used appropriately to provide extra detail in the article. Warofdreams talk 15:59, 27 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Except that he wasn't the candidate in the Parliamentary by-election..... Emeraude (talk) 16:06, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, meant general election, not by-election. Clearly doesn't affect the argument. Warofdreams talk 22:06, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Well it does - being a failed candidate does not mean notability so he does not qualify for an article on those grounds, unless there is something else that gives it. There isn't. Emeraude (talk) 10:22, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's not WP:BLUDGEON this discussion to death.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:25, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * As pointed out above, this article is sourced to multiple, in-depth profiles and interviews in major British media that were published over the course of several years and are by no means WP:ROUTINE campaign coverage. It passes WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:23, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 23:23, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep sufficient reliable and in-depth coverage exists to demonstrate notability. Lepricavark (talk) 03:04, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * KeepDon't see why someone is trying to delete this page, admins should be politically unbiased when making decisions to delete pages.Baconmanz (talk) 01:22, 9 February 2017 (GMT)
 * CommentRecommended that author of this page also looks into Pete Durnell to add any other sources he may think viable.Baconmanz (talk) 01:22, 9 February 2017 (GMT)
 * Keep The GNG has been met. Exemplo347 (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2017 (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.