Revision as of 13:29, 4 June 2007 editWadewitz (talk | contribs)50,892 editsm Assessed as "Stub" for WPBiography via script← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:41, 29 July 2009 edit undoEncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users18,358 editsm →NOW arrticleNext edit → | ||
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==from Vfd== | ==from Vfd== | ||
On 18 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See ] for a record of the discussion. | On 18 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See ] for a record of the discussion. | ||
== NOW arrticle == | |||
FYI, the statement about Holyday being nominated as Toronto's worst councillor is tied to the previous sentences. Therefore it doesn't stand on its own but provides context for Holyday's 'voting record'. While the article doesn't specifically call him 'Toronto's worst councillor' it does put him at the top of a top ten list of the worst councillors and labels him as 'Public Enenmy Number One'. IMO that's enough to label him as the worst councillor. ] (]) 23:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
That is a matter of opinion from a tabloid, this is not like the academic ranking of ]. ] (]) 01:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
:You are correct to note that ''Now Magazine'''s ranking of the 10 Worst Councillors in Toronto is not an academic listing. This, however, is quite beside the point. It's a ''journalistic'' ranking, and is suitable for inclusion in the article accordingly. ] (]) 04:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
::A tabloid ranking is not suitable for inclusion, period. ] (]) 16:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
::NOW Magazine is hardly a tabloid. ] (]) 16:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:41, 29 July 2009
Biography: Politics and Government Stub‑class | ||||||||||
|
from Vfd
On 18 Feb 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Doug Holyday for a record of the discussion.
NOW arrticle
FYI, the statement about Holyday being nominated as Toronto's worst councillor is tied to the previous sentences. Therefore it doesn't stand on its own but provides context for Holyday's 'voting record'. While the article doesn't specifically call him 'Toronto's worst councillor' it does put him at the top of a top ten list of the worst councillors and labels him as 'Public Enenmy Number One'. IMO that's enough to label him as the worst councillor. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 23:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
That is a matter of opinion from a tabloid, this is not like the academic ranking of Historical rankings of United States Presidents. GoldDragon (talk) 01:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- You are correct to note that Now Magazine's ranking of the 10 Worst Councillors in Toronto is not an academic listing. This, however, is quite beside the point. It's a journalistic ranking, and is suitable for inclusion in the article accordingly. CJCurrie (talk) 04:00, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- A tabloid ranking is not suitable for inclusion, period. GoldDragon (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
- NOW Magazine is hardly a tabloid. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 16:41, 29 July 2009 (UTC)