Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vern Hughes (3rd 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion.

What discussion there is here is remarkably indifferent to the article's existence, but since nobody really wants to keep this around, I guess soft delete is the most appropriate outcome.  Sandstein  11:43, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Vern Hughes
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The subject is a perennial Australian political candidate. I was initially a "week keep" when the article was PRODed a month ago given some mainstream media coverage of his many, many campaigns over many years. However, it seems from the article history that the subject may object to having an article on the basis of his only claim to notability, and wants an article on his decidedly non-notable work in his day job. Given that, I'm inclined to err on the side of getting rid of it entirely.

(For reference, I was one of the primary people arguing for "keep" in the first AfD nomination a decade ago, which was also affected by the nominator being a sockpuppet of a banned user, and the second nomination was an attempt to relitigate the outcome a week later.) The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 02:21, 11 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:28, 18 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:34, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Australia. Shellwood (talk) 07:41, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - is the subject still editing the article? The one listed on the talk page hasn't edited since 2007 but there are a few IP edits I can see that make some odd changes. If they're no longer editing and there's notability derived from the perennial candidature then I woudld be inclined to revise the article to focus on what they are actually notable for (which does look like it includes some independent sourcing). If there's consensus that there is a notability issue overall, then I accept deletion may be appropriate, but at the moment I am a bit concerned about the principle of deleting an article primarily on the basis of the subject's wishes. Deus et lex (talk) 11:03, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * There was a very recent edit or two that seemed to be either from the subject or someone closely associated with them and objecting to the focus on their political candidacies, and I was of the view that it wasn't worth a content dispute to keep the material that gives him a borderline case for notability in the article if the subject objected to it. I was the strongest keep vote in the first AfD years back and in hindsight I'm not sure why - there's some coverage, but at best it could be said to barely surpass WP:GNG, and I wouldn't disagree now with the several people who assessed it as falling short. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 07:16, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment My view is delete simply based on lack of reaching notability threshold. I wouldn’t think you get on wiki simply by being a perennial candidate. But that said I’m not a particular follower of Vic politics and defer to others of greater experience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ponyshine (talk • contribs) 14:12, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.