Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert A Paquin III

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robert A Paquin III[edit]

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

Unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject of the BLP, thus does not meet GNG or BASIC. The subject also does not meet POLITICIAN in that he has not held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, he merely ran for state office. This article was previously deleted via PROD but reinstated after the decision was contested. J04n(talk page) 19:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 19:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 19:35, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails our notability guideline for politicians, and there is no evidence that he has received in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources for his political consulting work. Sources provided don't qualify. Cullen328 (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my prod rationale. I could find no non-trivial sources independent of the subject. The best simply noted his election losses. And for the record, I'm not an American, let alone a "whiny democrat" as suggested by the ~~pot~~ editor contesting the prod. Or perhaps Joe was the target of that. None the less, I have no COI here. Electrified Fooling Machine (talk) 20:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Articles about non-notable local politicians are inevitably targets for either puffery (as is the case here) or attack jobs, given the absence of reliable sources on which a proper article can be built. That's why we delete them. --Mkativerata (talk) 01:46, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Please point out the "Puffery" as it doesnt seem to appear to me... Merriam Webster defines a politician as: 1: a person experienced in the art or science of government; especially : one actively engaged in conducting the business of a government 2a : a person engaged in party politics as a profession. This subject falls under at least one if not both of those definitions. As far as verifiable sources - does anyone here know about google? It took 10 seconds to find the following: High Traffic Local Media Outlet lists subject as "Who is 'Hot' in RI" http://www.golocalprov.com/politics/side-of-the-rhode-whos-hot-and-whos-not-in-ri-politics/ Yet another piece from same outlet. http://www.golocalprov.com/politics/gop-candidates-downplay-party-endorsement-of-opponents/ Local Paper http://www.cranstononline.com/view/full_story/10084730/article-No-seat-goes-unchallenged-for-Cranston-City-Council?instance=right_col_latest_news State Paper http://www.projo.com/ri/cranston/content/CRANSTON_RACES_24_07-24-10_U5JAA0O_v17.3a691ba.html State News http://southcounty.abc6.com/content/clegg-congressional-campaign-announces-new-public-appeal Need I go on? It may need some cleaning up, but this is an accurate reflection of a person who makes a difference in the world of RI politics, especially given his age. I do know the subject, but everything I have posted here is factual. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.172.166.51 (talk) 17:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to argue for keeping the article, you need to provide significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject -- sources that discusses the subject directly and in detail. Not trivial passing mention (two of your links do nothing more than state his name), not some political spiel for his failed local district elections for which he clearly fails WP:POLITICIAN, not your personal opinions of the state of RI politics, and certainly not Merriam-Webster's definition of politician. Electrified Fooling Machine (talk) 14:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Political consultant who once ran for state office and lost. None of the puffery (and yes, that's what it is) is sourced; note particularly the unverified claim that he "has been recognized on numerous occasions by such esteemed organizations as..." --MelanieN (talk) 03:56, 4 April 2011 (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.