Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Maj

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. MBisanz ^talk 00:02, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Chris Maj

Chris Maj (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Unnotable person, no referances, search reports little notability Bacchus87 (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment As a life long Rochester, NY resident with a slightly below average interest in local politics, I can say that the subject was involved in the Democratic primary race during the last mayoral elections. Given that, like a lot of other U.S. cities, the Democratic primary is fundamentally the at-large election (Dems generally get >75% of city votes), there is some minor signifance in that. Here is an article referencing his candidacy. City newspaper is a free weekly, but it is the only general news alternative to the "commercial" newspaper in town, and very professionally done (I have no affiliation with said newspaper other than a weekly reader). Another source, another, etc... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.69.39.11 (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Fails notability guidelines at nearly every step. Not only was he the candidate of an extremely minor party, but he failed to win the primary for a position of low notability in the first place. On the off chance that he might have won, the position of Mayor of Rochester, NY would still not really be enough. This is a local politician with nearly no local coverage. DarkAudit (talk) 01:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
  • Clarification Outside of the most major cities, mayors are not notable enough outside their local area, not just Rochester. DarkAudit (talk) 13:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:00, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

• The mayor of Rochester properly has an article, but failed candidates for such offices are rarely notable. The news coverage was solely based on Maj's campaign, making it a BLP1E. However, it should be noted that Chris Maj was the second president of the original Rochester Cannabis Coaltion, which later became Students for Sensible Drug Policy and is now a national organization. That may confer additional notability beyond his mayoral campaign. I am abstaining from a recommendation because I know Chris Maj personally. Powers ^T 14:55, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
  • As an addendum, if the consensus is to delete, I recommend a transwiki to RocWiki. Powers ^T 15:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:05, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete, failed candidate, was unable to find any coverage of him except for letters to the editor (written by him), and a couple of minor mentions as a candidate. Nothing significant, and therefore I don't believe he meets the WP:BIO notability guideline. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:48, 28 March 2009 (UTC).

*Delete: When the party is not notable enough, how can their candidate be? I don't see any notability outside the party. Deletion Mutation 15:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC) N.B. !vote of sockpuppet of blocked user struck through. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

• Delete and transwiki per User:LtPowers. He's quoted in an article in Rolling Stone magazine as a spokesman for the original Rochester Cannabis Coaltion, which is clearly notable a group for the Rochester wiki. Ottre 21:40, 28 March 2009 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.