Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Thompson (politician)


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 15:01, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Simon Thompson (politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable person. I could not find any Google news results for him. JDDJS (talk) 03:35, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - Non-notable subject, does not meet WP:N. The article title is misleading as the person described is not a politician but a minor party official. Article was created by an editor with a long history of promoting the people and ideas of one political party and is currently being considered for a topic ban for biased editing at Administrators'_noticeboard. - Ahunt (talk) 11:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete I'm not seeing the notability here. Media mentions that are found, are devoted to the person he replaced in the Harper administration, the more notable Dimitri Soudas. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:06, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Deletion No notability. TFD (talk) 19:34, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Deletion No notability. I did a Google search of his name and a number of articles about his resignation from the Conservative Party came up. I can see that one may argue that he is notable due to his position as the Executive Director of the Conservative Party in Canada, but I don't think this Simon Thompson is notable enough to meet the Wikipedia guidelines on notability. Respectfully delete. --DukeU (talk) 21:03, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Being an officer inside a political party's internal organizational structure, even a senior officer, is not a role that grants an automatic presumption of notability — a person who holds such a role lives or dies on the volume of reliable source coverage that is available specifically about them, and not on any policy that all people who have held the role automatically get to have articles no matter how poorly sourced they are. I'd be willing to reconsider my conclusion if the sourcing could be significantly improved to properly demonstrate that Thompson himself has been the subject of significant RS coverage in his own right, but this version as written is a delete. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Entire evidence of "notability" comes from article about person losing the job he took over. --Rob (talk) 05:50, 13 May 2014 (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.