Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warren Christopher (politician Maryland)


 * 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, no prejudice against recreation if stronger notability claims have been found--Ymblanter (talk) 07:32, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Warren Christopher (politician Maryland)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unelected politician failing WP:POLITICIAN Winner 42 Talk to me!  18:07, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete since the subject is a candidate and the article doesn't establish any other notability. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T&middot;E&middot;C) 19:11, 25 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN and WP:GNG as an unelected politician. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:17, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - really unfortunate that he has that name, which makes sources harder to find, but it seems is currently running again, and also I am thinking he may qualify based on his military awards. I know the United Nations Medal is fairly common but unsure about how often some of the others are given. He has a pretty impressive resume - obviously that bio there is very promotional but I am assuming the basic facts are true.  —Мандичка YO 😜 19:18, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  01:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions.  lavender |(formerly HMSSolent )| lambast  01:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment - Hi All. I am working diligently to include Mr. Christopher's notable contributions to his Wikipedia page. He has been a chief of staff in the Department of Interior and a Senior Advisor to former Senator Hillary Clinton. This is a work in progress and I am new as user. I understand the importance of maintaining standards and the reliability of data on Wikipedia. I will also continue to add citations, in compliance with Wikipedia requirements, over the coming days. Thanks in advance for your understanding and patience.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TWLcomm--TWLcomm (talk) 15:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC) (talk--71.178.206.115 (talk) 15:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC) • contribs) 15:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per POLITICIAN and WP:SOLDIER. (I have no idea what "Commanding Officer in Europe" means, but it's obviously not the Commanding Officer, not if he was just a lt. col.) Subject to change if political/government positions are sourced and notable. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:14, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and sandbox: What would be necessary is independent reliable source coverage of him as himself. That's lacking at this time. Incidentally, on the article name it might be better as Warren Christopher (Maryland politician) or "Warren Christopher (b. 19--)" and then, if the article made, a disambiguation at Warren Christopher. The encyclopedia can handle the confusion, but the current name is a bit clunky, and it will only work if its subject remains local. I recommend the author putting the article in his or her user space and continuing to work on it. When there are RS articles on the subject, it can then be moved over. Hithladaeus (talk) 13:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * delete or move to userspace he ran for office in 2014, and did not win. Being a Lt. Col. ret. is not notable, unless the significant sourcing upholds notability. If User:TWLcomm, User:Jaorquina or someone else wants to take it to user space,  source it and then submit it - I'm good with that.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:12, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Unelected candidates for office do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates, and nothing else in this article is written substantively enough or sourced well enough to claim that he gets over some other notability rule instead of WP:NPOL. Even the insufficient number of sources that are here are all unreliable ones that cannot support a person's notability under WP:GNG — every last one of them is primary, user-generated or bloggy. Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if a stronger notability claim and better sourcing come to pass. Bearcat (talk) 01:51, 3 June 2015 (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.