Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tag Greason

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. I'm giving little weight to the argument that he may be notable in future Kevin (talk) 03:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tag Greason

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

Appears to be the type of situation that WP:POLITICIAN highlights as not sufficing to establish notability. Just wait three weeks and see if he gets to be included then as an actual House of Delegates member. —Largo Plazo (talk) 00:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Lacks significant press coverage. If he get elected then the article could be recreated if coverage is significant. ttonyb (talk) 01:05, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.
Delete. He might be notable because of his day job (his employer may well be notable), but I can't find references to prove it. His employer's biographies page gives a bit more detail about him. This Google News archive search has 31 stories, mostly relating to the current campaign and to a previous one in which he tried to run for a local school bord. -- Eastmain (talk) 04:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - this was one of several articles posted by the creator on candidates in the same election, two of which I speedied myself. This one is actually slightly notable as a local politician, with some coverage in the Wash. Post [1], [2], [3]. MuffledThud (talk) 08:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Isn't it implicit in WP:POLITICIAN that people running for any office will be mentioned in their local press as a matter of course, so that evidence of notability needs to consist of more than routine mentions in the local press? I know the Washington Post is a paper of record, a reliable source for most purposes on Wikipedia, but for local election purposes it functions as the local press. If we were to look at it otherwise, then it would mean that candidates for office in districts that are within the local coverage area of a major newspaper are inherently more notable than candidates for office in districts that don't happen to be in the local coverage area of a major newspaper, and that wouldn't be right. Now, if these articles had appeared in the Baltimore Sun or the Hartford Courant or the New York Times, it would be a different matter. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Notability questions in such close proximity to an election should be delayed until after the result. If he wins in three weeks, keep him. If not, then he can be deleted.Phenry09 (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Where exactly does this say this in WP:POLITICIAN? If he is not notable now but becomes notable, the article can be recreated. ttonyb (talk) 23:09, 19 October 2009 (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.