Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Alan McCann

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 12:12, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Alan McCann


Poorly written WP:BLP, started in articlespace and then moved to draftspace rather than being deleted as it should have been, about a person notable only as president of a political party's local riding association. This is not a claim of notability that passes NPOL in and of itself, and the sourcing shown here is 60 per cent primary sources and 40 per cent routine local coverage of the type that local political organizers would always be expected to get -- the volume, range and depth is nowhere near enough to get him a WP:GNG pass in lieu of failing NPOL. The correct response to this would have been AFD deletion, not draftspacing -- it's not just an article that needs improvement, because there's no amount of possible improvement that would be enough to make a president of a political party's local chapter in one local electoral district notable for that in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 20:38, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Urm... Campbellton-Dalhousie is a provincial electoral district for the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick, Canada. (from Campbellton-Dalhousie) so a riding association isn't correct. To use United States analogs, this would be the chairman of a county (sub-state) political party.  I can't speak to the exact analogs, but it seems similar enough. Hasteur (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The system in Canada works differently than it does in the United States. Political parties at the provincial level in Canada are not simply chapters of the federal parties, but fully autonomous organizations with their own separate riding associations. They collaborate with the ideologically-affiliated federal parties, sure, but they're separate entities and not subsidiaries of the national parties. Bearcat (talk) 14:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That still doesn't fix the nominating statement where you mess up ridding (a provincal electoral district) with riding association (like an equestrian club). If you can't be bothered to get definitions right in your nominating statement, how many other things are incorrect there? Hasteur (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * "Riding association" is what political parties' local chapters in Canada are called — the "riding" is the district itself, while the political parties' local organizing committees in the ridings are called riding associations. I didn't mess anything up, I just used a Canadianism that you're mistaking for something else because you're unfamiliar with it. And just for the record, I'm Canadian and have a university degree in political science — so trust me, I know very much what I'm talking about when Canadian politics is on the table. Bearcat (talk) 15:22, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm not finding anything that requires a speedy deletion and this sits on the very fine line between justifying for mainspace vs giving it time for improvement in draft space, therefore I'm willing to give more time to let this improve. Hasteur (talk) 14:20, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The article has no prospect of improvement at all — it's not a role that can be sourced over WP:GNG in lieu of its failure to pass NPOL. Bearcat (talk) 14:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You seem to be mistaken about the purpose of Draft namespace. Notability is not applied in Draft namespace.  These are articles that could potentially become mainspace creations.  Notability can be a contributing factor in a MFD nomination, but there needs to be multiple other reasons.  This is a new articlespace page that was Draf-ified  to remedy WP:BITE.  Give it 6 months to see if the page improves.  If it doesn't then we can revisit the MFD. Hasteur (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Draftspace pages aren't required to be kept regardless of notability concerns. The correct way of handling this page would have been a deletion discussion, not draftspacing, because it has zero prospect of becoming a keepable article as things currently stand — so it can't gain an entitlement to stick around indefinitely just because somebody chose an incorrect response to it. Bearcat (talk) 15:22, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The Conservative or Liberal or NDP or whatever party in one of the 308 federal ridings is called the Riding Association. The organization nominates candidates for office, handles funds and in some cases is relevant to leadership contest voting. Being President of one is not particularly notable - it's a job many political types avoid  as it has a bunch of work and little thanks. The only thing that is remarkable is he jumped from the NDP to the Conservatives but in New Brunswick neither party has much depth of organization so anyone could likely take over a riding association by organizing a few friends into the party.  Legacypac (talk) 18:47, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Also what the heck is a "ridding" association the article refers too. Seems to be very poorly written by someone closely associated to the subject who can't spell or does not know what a riding association is. Legacypac (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete, am Canadian, can concur - riding president is not a notable political position. Plus, I've never seen Bearcat not know what he's talking about. Fails WP:OVERCOME and I think that's a perfectly good reason to get rid of an article that was draftified rather than deleted. And heey, if it isn't, let's move it back to mainspace and run it through AfD for the same expected result. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 08:28, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - This article should never have been draftified. We actually do the new editor a favour by letting them know that their article has no prospects for inclusion on Wikipedia rather than letting them waste their time working draft space under the misapprehension that with a bit more work this article would be suitable for main space despite it failing to meet notability by a wide margin. -- Whpq (talk) 11:31, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete no reason to keep this around in draft: not notable and has no prospects of being so. Put the page out of its misery. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:35, 23 August 2017 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.