The result was no consensus.
There is absolutely no consensus in any direction arising from this discussion. The keep !votes tend to point to the GNG; the delete !votes tend to either dispute that the GNG is met or focus on WP:POLITICIAN. All those positions are reasonable, but there's not consensus for any of them. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC) reply
He will be notable if he is elected, but not yet. This is local news. John Vandenberg ( chat) 13:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC) reply
*Delete - fails general notability guidelines and has a tinge of
WP:ATTACK about it.
Eddie.willers (
talk) 14:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC) Keep - since cleanup it appears to pass
WP:POLITICIAN but there's still things I think are irrelevant to his candidacy (like his financial woes) that could be construed as an attack.
Eddie.willers (
talk) 21:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
reply
The result was no consensus.
There is absolutely no consensus in any direction arising from this discussion. The keep !votes tend to point to the GNG; the delete !votes tend to either dispute that the GNG is met or focus on WP:POLITICIAN. All those positions are reasonable, but there's not consensus for any of them. Mkativerata ( talk) 20:02, 21 August 2010 (UTC) reply
He will be notable if he is elected, but not yet. This is local news. John Vandenberg ( chat) 13:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC) reply
*Delete - fails general notability guidelines and has a tinge of
WP:ATTACK about it.
Eddie.willers (
talk) 14:34, 29 July 2010 (UTC) Keep - since cleanup it appears to pass
WP:POLITICIAN but there's still things I think are irrelevant to his candidacy (like his financial woes) that could be construed as an attack.
Eddie.willers (
talk) 21:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
reply