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 no consensus. ‑Scottywong | [babble] || 04:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Atour Sargon

Atour Sargon (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:BLP1E and WP:NPOL. John from Idegon ( talk) 17:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. John from Idegon ( talk) 17:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. John from Idegon ( talk) 17:56, 27 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Keep - Don't really see any reason why the page should be deleted. The article as is currently uses 13 reliable sources, 12 of which (as far as I can tell) are secondary. This is more than the amount of sources used to create some stub-class articles that are still allowed to stay up on Wikipedia.

Furthermore, another user removed the stub tags that were previously on the page due to the larger amount of secondary sources used ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atour_Sargon&diff=974200341&oldid=974163585), but if this is still too few, I am happy to re-add the stub tags as an alternative to deletion. I am also willing to add a disclaimer at the top, such as the article needing additional citations for verification, etc, as an alternative to deletion.

As far as notabiliy goes, the amount of sources used should be enough to confirm a level of notability, but if they aren't, I am happy to add more since there are a lot more online. Also, because she is the first person to hold the specific position that she currently holds (as per all of the sources), I think it's worth keeping. In the very least, it should be kept for that reason and maybe have a disclaimer at the top, such as "more citations needed," etc.

Lastly, aside from the nomination for deletion, no reason has been provided on the talk page for why it should be deleted in the first place, so it's not really even clear which one of Wikipedia's reasons for deleting an article that this article would fall under. But I think the reasons I provided and the alternatives that I suggested show that this article can still be kept while maybe putting some dislciamers at the heading of the page that address whatever issues with the article we might have.

Ninos2576 ( talk) 18:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Keep - also wanted to respond to the reasons for deletion - I feel like the "notable for one event" option doesn't really apply since there's a separate section titled "Assyrian activism" that shows activism that she's done unrelated to the position (AMPAC, Vote Assyrian board member, Census project, guest speaking, and giving lectures with senators). On the second point, fact that she's a local politician isn't necessarily a reason to delete as the situation has received press attention and it isn't the only thing she is known for, as previously mentioned.

Thank you for listening

Ninos2576 ( talk) 18:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC) reply

• • Comment - I would also like to add my thoughts on the two reasons for the article's proposed deletion, since I don't believe I addressed them before. This is meant to be a comment under my "keep" vote. Apologies if I did not format it as such.

The first one, (Fails WP:BLP1E) states that she is notable for only one event. This isn't true since, as mentioned in the article, she is known for being the first Assyrian elected to the Lincolnwood board, being a board member of Vote Assyrian, being an advisor for the American Middle East Voters Alliance PAC, encouraing Assyrians in the US to fill out the census through Vote Assyrian's national Census Project, addressing the public with a Senator about civic engagement among Assyrians, being the co-chair of Schakowsky's Annual Ultimate Women's Power gathering (which included guests like Lori Lightfoot and Jill Biden, founding the Assyrian Chaldean Syriac Student Movement, being a guest speaker at several public events pertaining to Assyrians, and so on.

The second proposed reason ( WP:NPOL) states that the article should be deleted because she is a local politician who does not recevie much media attention. I believe this doesn't apply for a few reasons.

Firstly, It assumes that the article ONLY claims that she's notable for being a local politician, which isn't true. There's an entire section labeled Assyrian activism that shows reasons she is notable aside from her position (a lot of those reasons are mentioned above in my first point). All of the information in this section is sourced with reliable sources that are all both secondary and independent. The two Youtube videos used as sources are "Civic Engagement in the Assyrian Community" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVEKAqZbjD0&t=3m05s) and the Assyrian Student Association of Chicago's 2020 Graduation Ceremony ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eku_2Qw4pgc&t=53m27s). These are both reliable sources in this case because they are both interviews/speeches from Sargon, and the only information being claimed from them is that Sargon gave an interview/speech about a specific topic. The article only refers to the 2020 graduation video by saying "Sargon was a guest speaker at the Assyrian Student Association of Chicago's class of 2020 virtual graduation ceremony" which the video obviously can reliably prove. The claim that the article makes about the civic engagement video is that "In September 2019, Sargon, along with Senator Ram Villivalam and representatives from Vote Assyrian, addressed the public about the importance of civic engagement among the Assyrian American Community" which the video also obviously can reliably prove. None of the information that is said within the videos is cited, just the fact that the videos were taken, as well as information that Sargon provides about her personal life in the video.

Secondly, if you look at the WP:NPOL, you'll see that it says, "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline." This means that Sargon can still have a page as a local politician if she meets the general notability guidelines. One of the requirements listed in the page is "Significant coverage." Sargon's wikipedia page proves that she has received significant coverage. She is the sole subject of the article "Atour Sargon, longtime Lincolnwood resident, runs on ticket of transparency, diversity" ( https://theassyrianjournal.com/atour-sargon-longtime-lincolnwood-resident-runs-on-ticket-of-transparency-diversity/), and has a significant mention (including even being quoted) in the following articles: ( http://nadignewspapers.com/2019/05/22/lincolnwood-trustees-sworn-in-at-meeting/) ( https://theassyrianjournal.com/after-decades-of-underrepresentation-assyrians-find-their-place-in-the-polls/) ( https://borderlessmag.org/2020/05/06/hard-to-count-assyrian-community-prepares-for-the-census-amid-covid-19/) ( https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lincolnwood/ct-lwr-lincolnwood-election-tl-0411-story.html) ( https://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lincolnwood/ct-lwr-early-lincolnwood-results-tl-0404-story.html) ( http://www.janschakowsky.org/blog/watch-19th-annual-ultimate-womens-power-lunch).

And, as required by the notability guidelines page, all of these sources are secondary and independent. They meet the qualification for secondary sources because, as per the Wikipedia:No original research page, under the "primary, secondary, and tertiary sources" header, the sources are all not produced by Sargon herself. They are independent sources too, since they are all produced by organizations that have no relation as per the Wikipedia:Independent sources page under the people category. They are not the person (Sargon), family members (anyone related to Sargon), friends (none of Sargon's friends), employer (no one who employs Sargon), or employees (no one employed by Sargon). The sources come from Jan Schakowsky's website (who is a congresswoman unrelated to Sargon in any of the previously mentioned ways), Borderless Magazine, the Chicago Tribune, Nadig Newspapers, the Assyrian Journal, Medill News Service, and some others. There is one primary source from the Village of Lincolnwood, who is Sargon's employer, but that's it (from what I see).

The only other grievance I believe I saw was that the sources are local and/or barely mention Sargon. My mention of the sources above shows why they do mention Sargon in depth. As for the point about them being local, this isn't true as well. After looking on the websites of the Assyrian Journal ( https://dc.medill.northwestern.edu/#sthash.gtQV7Z1l.dpbs), Borderless Magazine ( https://borderlessmag.org/), the Assyrian Journal ( https://theassyrianjournal.com/), I see that they all cover a wide variety of significant national issues, not just local ones.

Because of all the reasons outlined above, I believe the page should exist in some capacity. I have addressed every argument on the contrary using wikipedia's own community guidelines. In the very least, it justifies having the page exist but using some of the alternatives to deletion mentioned by Wikipedia, such as having tags like cleanup, stub, refimprove, or the one that says that this biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. I feel as if though keeping the page but adding some of these tags as dislcaimers at the top is a good reason to keep it, since the stuff I addressed above shows why the page should exist in some capacity.

I believe this reply has addressed every grievance and reason as to why the article was proposed to be deleted, and show why it should exist in some capacity. Thank you again for listening to my suggestions

Ninos2576 ( talk) 07:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete Youtube is not a reliable source. Most of these sources have extremely passing mention of Sargon or are extremely local. Any elected official is going to get some level of coverage, but we have intentionally decided most elected officials are not notable if they have held only local positions. The passing mentions from other contexts do not add up to showing notability. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 12:52, 28 August 2020 (UTC) reply

• • Thank you for the suggestion. But the Yotube sources in question are interviews/speeches by Sargon made and uploaded by third parties who are independent of her, meaning that they are secondary sources. And they are reliable because the only information being claimed through them is the fact that Sargon was giving speeches/interviews at certain times, and not citing any of the info that she claimed in those speeches/interviews. Since a lot of sources mention her and several in the article have her as the sole subject of them, perhaps one of the alternatives to deletion can be adding tags at the top of the page, such as stub tags or tags that critique some of the the sources used in the article? Just a possible alternative suggestion.

I also wanted to point out that there is an entire section titled "Assyrian activism" which points out other reasons unrelated to her local office position to show why she's notable. This means that the past standard for deletion probably doesn't apply because she's notable for reasons unrelated to the office (Vote Assyrian board member, AMVotePac board member, census campaigning, meeting with prominent politicians such as Schakowsky, Lori Lightfoot, and Ram Villivalam to discuss Assyrian issues, campaigning on behalf of these individuals, etc)

Thanks again.

Ninos2576 ( talk) 21:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC) reply

Keep - Atour seems to fall under the "general notability" listing as she has received regular significant coverage as a political leader of a minority community from reliable sources independent of the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbjoe15 ( talk • contribs) 19:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC) reply

• Delete: Fails WP:NPOL for political career, but I also don't see notability for activism career. All but one of the sources for activism are connected to her or another political candidate in some way and aren't RS. The one potential RS (Borderless magazine) I see is quotes her about the census and has only like about her. I also don't see any GNG fulfilling sources, as the user above claims. Side note: there's possibly an offwiki attempt to brigade this, I'm sure any closer will be able to see. Regards, TryKid  ^{dubious – discuss} 22:24, 29 August 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Comment - I don't see why any of the sources in the activism section wouldn't apply. They are all either speeches with her in which she personally confirms information (all uploaded by people/groups who are unaffiliated with her), things uploaded by other parties' websites (such as Jan Schakowsky's website and the AMVOTEPAC Website), articles posted by news organizations (Borderless Magazine, Medill News, Nadig News, Assyrian Journal, etc). Some of them have extensive involvement/mention of her while others are less, but I think that proves that the page should exist in some capacity, at least with a stub tag or one of the tags that I mentioned before in my previous comment to notify readers that the article may have some weaknesses ("this biography of a living person needs additional cirations," etc.

Thank you. Ninos2576 ( talk) 07:40, 4 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Keep per WP:GNG. It's not the best case, but the subject is covered in multiple outlets, at least one of which has an international scope. BLP1E doesn't apply here.-- User:Namiba 13:28, 15 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment - I would just like to point out since my last comment that the politics section of the article has grown substantially since it was last discussed on this board (see these diffs and note that the date/time difference is after the above comments and votes were posted: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atour_Sargon&diff=978994669&oldid=978372856 and https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atour_Sargon&diff=978997332&oldid=978996281). It grew to the point where it needed to be split into two sub-sections (“election” and “as trustee.” Furthermore, the politics section now cites a total of about 15 sources, including ones as prominent as the Chicago Tribune, and provides a much more detailed account of the political career. I think this shows that the article definitely should exist in some form as per WP:GNG. (maybe even as a stub or with a maintenance tag such as the ones in Template:BLP sources). Furthermore, I think WP:NPOL has been met as well. However, I just wanted to reiterate that the political career is not the only reason that the article cites her as being notable for, so WP:NPOL doesn’t necessarily apply, even though it has now been met by the substantial (and sourced) expansion of the political career section over the past few days. It also proves WP:BLP1E doesn't apply here. Thank you. Ninos2576 ( talk) 04:22, 19 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment - there's still no meeting of NPOL here. Every single reference is about her successful run for an utterly and completely insignificant office. The only sources that aren't local do not come within a driver's shot of meeting our reliable sources policy. And I'm sorry, but it's utterly ridiculous to hinge the achievement of such an insignificant office on the fact that she's the first of a certain nationality. She's an American, and per WP:INHERIT, facts about her parents are not relative to her notability.   John from Idegon ( talk) 23:18, 19 September 2020 (UTC) reply
• Comment - As I've said before, this "not meeting WP:NPOL" argument assumes that the only reason she's notable is for the position. She's not. there's an entire Assyrian activism section that shows her notability in ways that are completely divorced from the political position. this includes being a on an executive of two Middle Eastern nonprofit organizations, being a representative of the of the Assyrian community at a meeting with Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky, Mayor of Chicago Lori Lightfoot, and Second Lady of the United States Jill Biden, being involved with the Vote Assyrian's census project, and being a guest speaker at several large Assyrian public events. This, AFTER BEING COMBINED with the political career, is more than enough to establish notability as per WP:GNG, which was mentioned by several other users on this discussion. Her position is not the only thing that establishes notability, as evidenced by the sources that make no mention or little mention of her position but still mention notable activism that she's done. Either way, the article still meets WP:NPOL considering the fact that the section now cites 15 reliable sources, including ones with a national scope such as the Chicago Tribune AND including sources where she's the sole subject or a significant subject of the source (The Assyrian Journal sources, the public speech sources, and the meeting with Schakowsky/Lightfoot/Biden source). This is a lot more than what can be said for many other stub-class biography articles on Wikipedia which are able to exist without question. This is a lot of coverage considering the fact that it's apparently an "insignificant position." The WP:INHERIT thing doesn't apply because Assyrian is an ethnicity, not a nationality, as per every single source on the Assyrian people Wikipedia page, as well as the common knolwedge that there is no modern country called Assyria for her or her parents to be from or be a citizen of. There hasn't been one for thousands of years, so it isn't her nationality, nor her parents'. It's an ethnicity. So her accomplishments as an ethnic Assyrian activist should still be noted since those would be true whether or not she is an American by nationality. I am also happy to re-add the stub tags that other users removed ( https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Atour_Sargon&diff=974200341&oldid=974163585) if that's a way to remedy this. I feel like that's a good solution considering the fact that the article is just as, if not more content-heavy and source-heavy than many stub-class biography articles on Wikipedia. The sheer size and amount of sources in the article show that it should exist in some form at per WP:GNG, so perhaps a stub tag is the way to do that. All in all, the subject of the article is discussed by many reliable/secondary sources for several different reasons, including sources with a national scope and ones where she is the sole subject or a significant subject of the source. Even if it's an "insignificant position," the amount of coverage she gets, both for reasons related and unrelated to the position, prove it should exist as per WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Furthermore, the article has more content and sources than many stub articles that are allowed to exist on Wikipedia. For all these reasons, the article most certainly meets notability guidelines as per numerous Wikipedia policies, including WP:GNG, WP:NPOL, WP:BLP1E. Thank you for listening. Ninos2576 ( talk) 03:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC) reply

  @ Ninos2576:, you should stop trying to bludgeon the discussion. Whether a subject meets NPOL or not has literally nothing to do with the number of sources. She fails NPOL because she doesn't hold a national or state level position and hasn't received 'significant coverage. Coverage relating to politics amounts to trivial mentions in coverage of Lincolnwood local elections. After looking at the sources, it's pretty clear she doesn't meet GNG, not for politics, and not for activism. Regards, TryKid  ^{dubious – discuss} 11:19, 20 September 2020 (UTC) reply

• Comment - I am sorry, but I don't know what is meant by bludgeon in this instance. I feel as if though the article meets notability guidlines as per several Wikipedia policies (see my previous comment), so I mentioned all of the reasons and responded to other people's concerns about this. At this point, it's becoming repition on both sides, as I have mentioned before that it isn't just the quantity of sources but rather the quality (see the Chicago Tribune point), the fact that she's at the center of many of them (the interviews/speeches, The Assyrian Journal articles, and the meetings with Schakowsky/Lightfoot/Biden point), and the fact that her political career, even if "insighnificant," deserves a spot on Wikipedia due to its combonation with her other accomplishments, for which there has been a lot of coverage relative to other stub articles on Wikipedia. My proposal to make this a stub article has never been responded to either, so I feel as if though that's the best solution because it allows the article to exist as per the fact that it meets WP:GNG while still acknolwedging that there is a lot of work to be done. My reasons for why it meets WP:NPOL are above too. Thank you. Ninos2576 ( talk) 18:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • TryKid is referring to WP:BLUDGEON. Also, please thread your comments properly as per WP:Talk page guidelines#Layout.  Bait30   ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 05:37, 22 September 2020 (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.