Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Allison
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 redirect. Any content worth merging can be pulled from the page history. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Tim Allison (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article used to promote candidate for political office. Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Article offers very little content, along with a link to the candidates campaign website. Cindamuse (talk) 22:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Pure WP:VSCA … lacks Attribution to Verify WP:BIO or WP:BLP notability criteria, let alone WP:GNG. Happy Editing! — 71.166.157.40 (talk · contribs) 22:57, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. -- THENEWMONO 23:12, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:24, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete He's a major-party candidate for office, but he has never held office - and a Google News search turns up nothing in reliable sources. So he fails WP:POLITICIAN. --MelanieN (talk) 06:42, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Retain. Article has been significantly modified. He is a major party candidate for Congress and users are checking daily through Google and Wikipedia for information on the candidates for office. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanwarner37 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 13 October 2010 (UTC) — Alanwarner37 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Comment - It appears obvious from their edits that User:Alanwarner37 is attempting to use Wikipedia as a soapbox … their unreferenced additions to the article about the subject's opponent should be reverted per WP:BLP. — 71.166.157.40 (talk) 18:14, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No outside notability shown, and candidature does not of itself confer notability (so far as Wikipedia is concerned - politicians may have their own ideas which are not necessarily encyclopaedic). Peridon (talk) 18:06, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment As a UK national, I am neutral as to Demolicans and Repubocrats, and have removed the unsourced material at the opponent's page. (I am also neutral to my country's own politicians, disliking them as a breed.) Wikipedia is not a soapbox. See WP:SOAPBOX. Peridon (talk) 18:24, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Very strong keep. He has been endorsed by the California Democratic Party http://www.timallison.com/Latest-News/ALLISON-ENDORSED-BY-CALIFORNIA-DEMOCRATIC-PARTY and he has been heavily covered in reliable Ventura County sources http://www.timallison.com/Latest-News/ Much of the guff has been edited out of the article (take a fresh look). Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Who he's been endorsed by is irrelevant. He's still a candidate with no outside notability shown. See WP:POLITICIAN. He would only (maybe...) get notability for being a candidate if he stood for the Presidency. Peridon (talk) 19:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- PS - the subject's website is not considered a reliable source for establishing notability. WP:RS Peridon (talk) 19:55, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Who he's been endorsed by is irrelevant. He's still a candidate with no outside notability shown. See WP:POLITICIAN. He would only (maybe...) get notability for being a candidate if he stood for the Presidency. Peridon (talk) 19:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, anyway, he won the Democratic primary in his district. I would call him Notable just for that reason. Sincerely, your pal, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:55, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge/Redirect to United States House of Representatives elections in California, 2010#District 24,
creating a new section for this district as needed, per WP:POLITICIAN. RayTalk 15:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I voted Delete above, but I would also endorse a merge/redirect as suggested by Ray. --MelanieN (talk) 15:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I fully support a redirect as well. Cindamuse (talk) 04:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge/redirect. Unelected politicians are a disaster in terms of COI/POV, this is an excellent example of why. tedder (talk) 06:01, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Major party nominees for a national position in a two party system should be considered notable. There will always be enough coverage to be found. DGG ( talk ) 22:11, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- That's what I thought, too, but when I did a search on the Ventura County Star site, I didn't find much. Maybe that is because the county is a heavily Republican area and the guy doesn't stand a chance. But that does not counter your and my conclusion — which I think is that the candidate who won the Demo primary is ipso facto a Notable figure, even if he or she loses. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.