Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Shaikh

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Shaikh

[edit]
Mike Shaikh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Shaikh was elected as a Senator-in-waiting at the Alberta Senate nominee election, 2012. The top three candidates from that election all "won," and the top two (Doug Black and Scott Tannas) were appointed to the Senate by PM Harper. No third vacancy - the one that would be filled by Shaikh - has yet occurred. However, since the election was held:

  • The legislation that governs Senatorial nominee elections in Alberta has expired,[1] meaning that there won't be any more of these elections held.
  • Current PM Trudeau is taking a different approach[2] to Senate appointments.

References

  1. ^ http://daveberta.ca/2016/12/alberta-senate-nominee-elections/
  2. ^ https://www.canada.ca/en/campaign/independent-advisory-board-for-senate-appointments.html

These factors make it unlikely that Shaikh will ever be appointed to the Senate. This is an interesting test case for WP:NPOL - Shaikh was elected, but hasn't assumed office in five years and likely will never. I don't believe he merits an article at this time. Madg2011 (talk) 16:43, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:08, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:28, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:28, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If and when he's appointed to the Senate, then he'll obviously qualify for an article on those grounds — but for the exact reasons Madg2011 describes, merely winning one of Alberta's unofficial senate nominee elections is not an automatic guarantee of appointment. These elections are not constitutionally mandated, but are one province's unofficial exercise in senate reform which prime ministers are free to support or ignore at their own discretion — generally, if the incumbent PM at the time of an Alberta senate vacancy is a Conservative, then a "senator-in-waiting" will get the seat(s), but if the incumbent PM is a Liberal, then most likely the "senator-in-waiting" won't get the seat. (Both Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin also ignored a couple of "senators in waiting" to make other appointments instead.) As of today, five of the winners since 1989 have gotten appointed while four have not, and that would have been five-four the other way if one of the non-appointed election winners from 1998 hadn't run again a second time in 2004 and then gotten appointed off that victory. So merely winning one of these elections is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass in and of itself, because it offers no guarantee that the person will ever actually accede to office. Which means for now, the only valid grounds for an article here would be getting him over WP:GNG for his career in business, which the minimal sourcing here isn't doing — if he actually gets appointed to the Senate, then he'll qualify for an article, but he doesn't get one just for being the winner of a theoretical election whose results nobody actually has any constitutional obligation to honour. And for added bonus, this is written remarkably like a résumé rather than an encyclopedia article, which isn't the type of article he would get to have even if he were an actual senator. Bearcat (talk) 23:27, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DrStrauss talk 14:55, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the article is a resume with no working references. Power~enwiki (talk) 19:04, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • As far as this being a "test case"; if the article passed WP:GNG I would support keeping the article, at least until the next Senator from Alberta is definitely someone else. The speculation above is accurate, but is still speculation as the Senate seat will not be open for another year. Power~enwiki (talk)
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mike_Shaikh&oldid=1138082149"