Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen J. Clay


 * 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. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Stephen J. Clay

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Insufficiently sourced WP:BLP of a city councillor. Indianapolis is not a global city for the purposes of WP:NPOL #2, so he isn't automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because he exists -- the notability test he would have to pass is that he could be referenced to nationalizing coverage that marked him out as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other city councillors.The ability to show six pieces of media coverage in his own local media market is not evidence of notability for a city councillor in and of itself, because every city councillor in every city can always show six pieces of local media coverage -- city councillors require evidence of media attention beyond just their own local media, or at least the ability to write a really substantive article that contextualizes their importance and not just a short stub that reads like a "meet your councillor" blurb, before they're notable enough for Wikipedia articles. Bearcat (talk) 16:52, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete for precisely the reasons given by Nom.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:12, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per norm. Lack of references, fails WP:NPOL. Lapablo (talk) 18:43, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - if you Google him per WP:BEFORE, there's actually more coverage of him, not much of it good. Allegations of a sexual assault of a minor surfaced, although charges were never filed.  He also made a controversial power grab by cutting a deal with Republicans to appoint them to oversight committees so they could save him, before he was forced out. The Indianapolis Business Journal []. CBS 4 Indianapolis [], the Indy Star [], WTHR Channel 13 [], and the Indianapolis Recorder [] all had coverage of him.  This isn't routine, but it is certainly local.  Since this never seemed to make it out of Indianapolis, the coverage is light on biographical profile info, and including the controversies could be construed as WP:UNDUE, I'll support a weak delete. It's not a slam dunk though. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  01:34, 14 March 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.