Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vi Daley

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. But I'm going to leave the redirect that's already there. dbenbenn | talk 15:16, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Vi Daley
Another 6-word substub reading: "Vi Daley is a Chicago Alderman." Is this Alderman-cruft, or a valuable contribution to Wikipedia and its readers? Are all Chicago Aldermen inherently notable and encyclopedic, such that simple elementary school styled sentences are acceptable as articles until expanded? Better yet, would this sort of "contribution" be tolerated if this were an article about a member of a municipal legislative body in a small town outside of U.S. soil?  GRider\talk 17:58, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Right on, Rider. This is totally and utterly useless.  Delete.  Please. - Lucky 6.9 18:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that aldermen are not in and of themselves notable. There's just way too many of them. Apply the professor test, I'd say. This one, unless significantly substantiated, should go. Delete Radiant! 18:41, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Personally, I don't think politicians at this level are inherently notable. However, I believe quite a few have survived VFD (mostly from Canada, if I remember correctly). I would really like to see VFD become more consistent, and less fickle. Niteowlneils 19:13, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * If possible, can you please cite examples? GRider\talk 19:22, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Pretty tough, since VFD:Old only has articles that were deleted. Haven't yet found any such articles that have survived Vfd, but I did find a surprising number of bluelinks at Toronto City Council. Niteowlneils 22:13, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Finally found an example: Talk:Peter_Hume. Also, note the number of bluelinks for mayoral election losers, as well as blue and redlinks for people who sought city-level offices at Ottawa municipal election, 2003. Niteowlneils 22:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Obviously these articles are much more sophisticated than 6-word substubs, but I will review them further as soon as I have a moment to spare.  GRider\talk 22:57, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: The Canadian politicians I've seen in the last few days have been Members of Parliament--roughly equivalent to the legislators in the U.S. House of Representatives.  There seems to be a building consensus that politicians at the national level are sufficiently notable for Wikipedia.  On the otherhand, municipal politicians are more of a mixed lot.  I would suggest that Mayors of all but the smallest communities should get the nod.  As for aldermen, city councillors, and the like&mdash;I'd say that they need to be notable for some particular reason (in addition to just holding office) to be worth mention.
 * Above left by User:TenOfAllTrades.
 * If my memory is serving me correctly, this was at least 3-4 months ago. Niteowlneils 22:13, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable. --Carnildo 20:48, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please read Votes for deletion/Bernie Hansen. Uncle G 00:38, 2005 Feb 18 (UTC)
 * Reply: If the Vi Daley substub was even a fraction of one percent as good as the Bernie Hansen article, believe me, it would not be nominated here for discussion.  But thank you none the less for the link. GRider\talk 00:47, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, can we at least agree that, if we had a good article on Vi Daley, it should be kept? This particular article has no content, and I'm indifferent to it. But if somebody adds even a small bit of detail, keep. Meelar (talk) 02:34, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * No, only if said article establishes notability beyond him being a Chicago alderman. Radiant! 17:07, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with Meelar. I think Chicago aldermen (and their equivalents in other major cities) are inherently notable, but I also think substubs like this are useless. -- Jmabel | Talk 03:35, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless expanded beyond stub status before February 22. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 11:22, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. See criteria for inclusion of biographies. --Pjacobi 00:54, 2005 Feb 21 (UTC)
 * Merge These should all be merged on to one Chicago Alderman page &mdash; Linnwood 07:19, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Remember this is VfD and not the Crusades. Hyacinth 00:23, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per my other votes on Chicago aldermen. Megan1967 08:01, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I decided to be bold and I redirected this to Chicago aldermen, as the other substubs generally have been. -R. fiend 18:06, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.