| Revision as of 04:28, 29 October 2006 editTJ Spyke (talk | contribs)93,344 edits →[]: Delete← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:35, 26 March 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (18 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was '''delete'''. ] 00:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{ns:0|B}} | |||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}} | |||
| The page history reveals that this began as an autobiography to promote the subject in his election bid. While the page has since been cleaned up, the subject is a non-notable candidate; standing in a seat he has no chance of winning. While I am happy to have pages for candidates with a reasonable chance of winning, Anderton needs a swing of around 25%. It is true that he briefly came to attention with his racist remarks, it did not blow up into a scandal, and he has since faded back into obscurity. ] 01:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | The page history reveals that this began as an autobiography to promote the subject in his election bid. While the page has since been cleaned up, the subject is a non-notable candidate; standing in a seat he has no chance of winning. While I am happy to have pages for candidates with a reasonable chance of winning, Anderton needs a swing of around 25%. It is true that he briefly came to attention with his racist remarks, it did not blow up into a scandal, and he has since faded back into obscurity. ] 01:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. </small> <small>-- ] 01:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)</small> | *<small>'''Note''': This debate has been included in the ]. </small> <small>-- ] 01:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Keep''' The controversy means that he is more well-known than most candidates, and thus notable. If he fails to win a seat in parliament, and does nothing else to warrant inclusion, then perhaps he will cease to be notable, but he is certainly notable now. ] 03:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' The controversy means that he is more well-known than most candidates, and thus notable. If he fails to win a seat in parliament, and does nothing else to warrant inclusion, then perhaps he will cease to be notable, but he is certainly notable now. ] 03:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :*See ]'s remarks below. She's an Australian. ] | ] 09:41, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete.''' The racist remarks had the potential to cause a controversy, but they simply didn't - they were only mentioned in two newspaper articles at the time, and it was very quickly forgotten. He never emerged from obscurity, has no chance of winning, and this is persistently getting edited by what appears to be his campaign stuff, so it'd be nice to be able to put this one out of its misery. ] 03:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | *'''Delete.''' The racist remarks had the potential to cause a controversy, but they simply didn't - they were only mentioned in two newspaper articles at the time, and it was very quickly forgotten. He never emerged from obscurity, has no chance of winning, and this is persistently getting edited by what appears to be his campaign stuff, so it'd be nice to be able to put this one out of its misery. ] 03:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' - per Raffles.] |
*'''Keep''' - per Raffles.] ] 04:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' Non-notable political candidate. The article even says the comment was removed before it caused any real controversy. ] 04:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' Non-notable political candidate. The article even says the comment was removed before it caused any real controversy. ] 04:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' per TJ Spyke. "He is notable for something that never became notable" is not exactly a winning argument. --] | ] 05:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - Notable polititian.] 06:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| **What makes him notable? ] 06:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. Making racial slurs might raise a few eyebrows, and result in few news articles and few blog posts. But, they don't make a person notable. ] | ] 09:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per nom. -- ] 10:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' - He's gained notoriety outside his state. I'm in Canberra, and he was a topic of conversation, so I came to Wiki to learn what might be learned. That being the case, I think he's now sufficiently notable to warrant keeping.] 11:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', unelected racist candidate with no hope of winning. ] 14:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC). | |||
| *'''Delete''' per above. ] 20:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per Rebecca. ] 01:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete'''. A Google News Archive search shows the only coverage he got was when he was nominated as the Liberal candidate in local newspapers. . A search for Gary Anderton on EBBSCO's Australia and New Zealand database comes up with no mention of the candidate but comes up with articles from the Geelong Advertiser as there is a Gary Anderton active in Geelong local cricket. As a Canberran, I had never heard of him and I follow Australian politics with a keener than average interest. ] 02:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per ]. Let ] handle news reports. Being a minor candidate is not sufficient per ], and the sole other source of arguable notability seems to be a highly ephemeral event. --] 04:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' per Raffles. ] 21:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' per Rebecca. --] 03:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC) (says ] 04:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC) while momentarily logged out). | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Latest revision as of 00:35, 26 March 2022
- 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. W.marsh 00:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Gary Anderton
The page history reveals that this began as an autobiography to promote the subject in his election bid. While the page has since been cleaned up, the subject is a non-notable candidate; standing in a seat he has no chance of winning. While I am happy to have pages for candidates with a reasonable chance of winning, Anderton needs a swing of around 25%. It is true that he briefly came to attention with his racist remarks, it did not blow up into a scandal, and he has since faded back into obscurity. Teiresias84 01:49, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Teiresias84 01:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep The controversy means that he is more well-known than most candidates, and thus notable. If he fails to win a seat in parliament, and does nothing else to warrant inclusion, then perhaps he will cease to be notable, but he is certainly notable now. Raffles mk 03:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- See Rebecca's remarks below. She's an Australian. utcursch | talk 09:41, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. The racist remarks had the potential to cause a controversy, but they simply didn't - they were only mentioned in two newspaper articles at the time, and it was very quickly forgotten. He never emerged from obscurity, has no chance of winning, and this is persistently getting edited by what appears to be his campaign stuff, so it'd be nice to be able to put this one out of its misery. Rebecca 03:50, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - per Raffles.Bakaman Bakatalk 04:23, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Non-notable political candidate. The article even says the comment was removed before it caused any real controversy. TJ Spyke 04:28, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per TJ Spyke. "He is notable for something that never became notable" is not exactly a winning argument. --Dhartung | Talk 05:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Notable polititian.Nileena joseph 06:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- What makes him notable? TJ Spyke 06:30, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Making racial slurs might raise a few eyebrows, and result in few news articles and few blog posts. But, they don't make a person notable. utcursch | talk 09:38, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- Encyclopaedia Editing Dude 10:27, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - He's gained notoriety outside his state. I'm in Canberra, and he was a topic of conversation, so I came to Wiki to learn what might be learned. That being the case, I think he's now sufficiently notable to warrant keeping.Afrohally 11:47, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, unelected racist candidate with no hope of winning. Lankiveil 14:17, 29 October 2006 (UTC).
- Delete per above. Eusebeus 20:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per Rebecca. JROBBO 01:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. A Google News Archive search shows the only coverage he got was when he was nominated as the Liberal candidate in local newspapers. . A search for Gary Anderton on EBBSCO's Australia and New Zealand database comes up with no mention of the candidate but comes up with articles from the Geelong Advertiser as there is a Gary Anderton active in Geelong local cricket. As a Canberran, I had never heard of him and I follow Australian politics with a keener than average interest. Capitalistroadster 02:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NOT. Let WikiNews handle news reports. Being a minor candidate is not sufficient per WP:Notability, and the sole other source of arguable notability seems to be a highly ephemeral event. --Shirahadasha 04:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per Raffles. Elomis 21:36, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per Rebecca. --124.254.121.175 03:59, 2 November 2006 (UTC) (says Roisterer 04:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC) while momentarily logged out).
- 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.