Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Logan Edgar

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. Jenks24 (talk) 07:27, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Logan Edgar[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Person considering running for a position that, if elected, still would not pass them WP:POLITICIAN. Being head of a Student union would be a consideration only if that had brought them into significant public attention, which is not the case here. Shirt58 (talk) 01:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On your point about significant public attention, he clearly has significant public/media attention on a local and national level.Wipkipkedia (talk) 02:06, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The "considering running" is not what gives this article notability. He is not just OUSA president but has gained significant media coverage on a range of events/issues above and beyond most other people in a similar position to his. I agree, almost all student association presidents are not notable. Logan Edgar clearly is due to the significant media coverage. Wipkipkedia (talk) 02:03, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If he's gained significant coverage on several issues nationally, then why is the only thing I see on Google campaign videos, news clippings from the school newspaper and a recount of some crime where he was the victim? The article also does not list any of these events/issues. If that is added, I might rethink my current stance. But now, it's just a guy considering running for City Council. Buggie111 (talk) 02:15, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Media Sources: Thrown in the deep end and swimming OUSA president to stand for DCC Presidents win University Council positions New bar for Otago students Students elected OUSA 'committed' to building a new student bar
This article has independent sources (WP:BASIC), a major local political figure who has received significant press coverage (articles go in depth about Logan Edgar) (WP:POLITICIAN). Overall, there is enough coverage. Wipkipkedia (talk) 02:35, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I suggest you expand the article using these sources. Buggie111 (talk) 02:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I intend to, are you swapping to a keep vote? Wipkipkedia (talk) 02:57, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, as the information is still not in the article. And, upon further review, I don't see that much media coverage outside of the school paper (only two other websites, meh.). My original post stands, Touchdown, Seahawks!, err, um, Delete. Buggie111 (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. 03:14, 27 October 2012 (UTC)-gadfium 03:14, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Insignificant. HOw much lower can the standard for notability go? DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 04:07, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable city council hopeful. Of the two independent sources currently in the article, one is a short bio in a provincial newspaper, and the other is an article in a free urban newsletter; neither indicate any real notability of the subject. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:16, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:POLITICIAN makes it clear that candidature is not a notable thing, and that notability for holding an elected office does not include city councils. So here we have a non-notable considering standing for a non-notable position. (Being president of a student association is also non-notable.) Please note that notability as used here is Wikipedia defined notability, and not necessarily what any dictionary might say. Peridon (talk) 17:10, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on the requirements of WP:POLITICIAN. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:07, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:SNOW. This will not end any other way. Drmies (talk) 20:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:POLITICIAN. Can always be restored if they ever meet WP:NOTABLITY requirements. MarnetteD | Talk 20:47, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Have clearly been outvoted. Two points I'll make: 1 I am definitely of the opinion that the current notability guidelines and/or the interpretation of those guidelines are too strict. 2 If you're doing a Google Search be sure to use Google New Zealand and search for pages in New Zealand. Wipkipkedia (talk) 22:03, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:POLITICIAN. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:20, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as Logan has a bit to go before meeting WP:POLITICIAN. It's a tough life bud. NealeFamily (talk) 03:35, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:51, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 20:51, 29 October 2012 (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.