Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tay Anderson


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 21:10, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Tay Anderson

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:BLP of a political figure notable only as a member of a school board. As always, this is not an "inherently" notable level of office that guarantees inclusion in Wikipedia in and of itself, and the existence of a small smattering of local coverage, which is simply expected to always exist for all school board members everywhere, does not get him over WP:GNG in lieu of having to pass NPOL. To qualify for an article on these grounds, he would need to show nationalized coverage demonstrating that he was much more notable than most other school board members -- and while there is one hit of coverage that expands beyond the local here, that still isn't enough. There's also a clear conflict of interest here, as the article has been extensively edited by a user named "TayAndersonCO". Bearcat (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Keep There's national coverage of his activism relating to the George Floyd protest. The WaPo, NYT, CNN, and PBS have either written about his activism or asked him to speak about the protests. The CNN article is within the last month. The COI seems minimal with almost no text added but a photo, DOB, and some grammar changes. --Meanderingbartender (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * A person does not get over the notability bar on sources in which he's doing the speaking about other things — for a source to support his notability, he has to be the subject being spoken about by other people. So he doesn't get over the bar on sources where he's an interview guest, or sources in which he gives a soundbite about Amy Coney Barrett: he gets over the notability bar by being the thing that other people are talking about, not sources in which he's doing the talking. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. In addition to lots of local coverage (e.g. ), having a full WaPo article meets the threshold for reliable sourcing.Citing (talk) 16:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Every school board member on the planet can always cite local coverage without exception, so local coverage is not enough to get a school board member over the bar all by itself. It requires nationalized coverage to make a school board member notable enough, and it requires a lot more than just one piece of that. Bearcat (talk) 16:27, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll have to disagree with you on this. Getting a full profile in WaPo, written about in the NYT as an important member in a movement, and being interviewed alongside Roxane Gay and Anna Deavere Smith pushes someone over the threshold for me. At the risk of invoking WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, I think this subject can be written about as extensively as, say, a major league athlete who plays one game.Citing (talk) 16:56, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter whether you disagree with me or not, because Wikipedia consensus is on my side: a person has to be the subject that other people are speaking about in the third person, not the person doing the speaking about subjects, for a source to count as support for his or her notability, and it does take a lot more than just one such source to get a person over the bar. Bearcat (talk) 17:16, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Tay is obviously notable and it's dumb that we are even having this discussion. If every soccer player that's ever lived can get a Wikipedia page, then school board members can too. Calling the coverage he has gotten a "small smattering" is dishonest at best. He certainly has gotten more coverage than your average school board member. And since when does someone need national coverage to be notable? The Denver metro area is larger than entire countries. And if you feel like there has conflict of interest edits, then remove them. I'll never understand why so many Wikipedians are trigger happy with deleting articles. Bluedude588 (talk) 06:43, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Politicians at the local level of office are not "inherently" notable — which means they're not automatically entitled to have articles just because they exist. Mayors, city councillors, county-level officials, school board members, and on and so forth, do have to show that they're considerably more notable than the norm for those levels of office, by virtue of being more than just locally notable within one city. It is true that we don't have a hard ban on "local" topics getting into Wikipedia — but local topics do have to clear a significantly higher burden of "why is this of interest to us?" than topics of much more obviously national significance do. Bearcat (talk) 13:59, 14 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete hyper-local politician, simply being an elected member of a school board(?!?) doesn't qualify someone for an article. That being said the Washington Post article is a decent one and there's a very good chance he'll be notable enough for an article in the near future. SportingFlyer  T · C  14:49, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * There's nothing against having "local" people on Wikipedia. He is an elected politician who has had a massive amount of coverage. Again, if Li Xiayan is notable, then Tay is too lol. Wikipedia does not require people to have a national presence. Tay has been reported on extensively, which fulfills any notability requirements. Bluedude588 (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, watch out for WP:OSE: just because article A is notable doesn't mean article B is, because article A may not actually be notable in the first place. You are correct local notability is not necessarily a barrier, but being on a school board doesn't meet our notability guidelines at WP:NPOL, and I don't think he's at a point where he's otherwise past the notability threshold, though as I note he's closer than a lot of other local politicians. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:44, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The sources found by Meanderingbartender show extensive national coverage, which likely passes WP:GNG by itself (recognizing the questions by Bearcat). Beyond that WP:POLOUTCOMES states that a local politician "may still clear the bar if they have received national or international press coverage, beyond the scope of what would ordinarily be expected for their role." To me, it is clear that the subject has received national coverage beyond what a normal school board member usually receives. --Enos733 (talk) 17:51, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm generally not in favor of school board directors getting articles, however, he oversees a major municipal school district and has received national coverage, so I think it's enough to pass the keep bar. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs )~ 18:30, 16 November 2020 (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.