| Revision as of 23:11, 24 February 2006 editBearcat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators1,564,929 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:11, 24 February 2006 edit undoBearcat (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators1,564,929 edits →[]Next edit → | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
| '''strong keep''' to Simon's non-supporters please don't try to stuff the ballot box here. let non-partisan wiki members judge this article. This attempt to delete is obviously politically motivated by a political opposition.--] 20:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | '''strong keep''' to Simon's non-supporters please don't try to stuff the ballot box here. let non-partisan wiki members judge this article. This attempt to delete is obviously politically motivated by a political opposition.--] 20:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
| : Eyeonvaughan, the only ballot-stuffing going on here is from supporters of the article. Remember, ] clearly spells out that contributors whose first known edit is to an AFD are at best suspicious, and at worst irrelevant and disregardable. And, for the record, you can can the allegations of partisan attacks; whatever your feelings about pm_shef, Misplaced Pages has a strict policy of assuming good faith in a dispute — and for what it's worth, I'm an NDPer and so's Samaritan, and we both expressed reservations about the article's keepworthiness. ] 22:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | : Eyeonvaughan, the only ballot-stuffing going on here is from supporters of the article. Remember, ] clearly spells out that contributors whose first known edit is to an AFD are at best suspicious, and at worst irrelevant and disregardable. And, for the record, you can can the allegations of partisan attacks; whatever your feelings about pm_shef, Misplaced Pages has a strict policy of assuming good faith in a dispute — and for what it's worth, I'm an NDPer and so's Samaritan, and we both expressed reservations about the article's keepworthiness too. ] 22:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 23:11, 24 February 2006
Simon Strelchik
Delete - Misplaced Pages's guidelines for living people's biographies when discussing politicians reads "Major local political figures who receive significant press coverage" and also mentions people holding the office of MP, MPP and so on. Strelchik does not fall into either of these categories. pm_shef 18:44, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- KeepThis article of Mr. Strelchik is very note worthy and from the tone of the unsigend (PM_shef) above sounds very politically motivated. Mr. Strelchik is currently President of the New Democratic Party of Canada EDA, he has been nominated for three Noble Peace Prize's and he was the candidate of record for the New Democratic Party of Canada in the Thornhill riding in the recent Canadian federal election. Please keep in mind that this request to delete was from the son of a candidate that ran against Mr. Strelchik in a municipal election a number of years ago. Mr. Strelchik is more worthy of an article than PM_shef’s father, which he posted a while back.--69.156.151.238 18:53, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- For clarification, Strelchik was not nominated for any nobel peace prizes. The organization that he happened to be a founding member (and director) of was nominated, not him. Yes, I'm the son of a councillor, Alan Shefman, Mr. Strelchik's opponent in the election before last, that has been established long ago on here and is not germane. As well, as you can see from the Wiki guidelines, being President of the NDP EDA in Thornhill does not constitute notability. Finally, again if you go to the Wiki Guidelines for Bios, Strelchik does not pass the Google Test, the 100 Year Test or the Verifiability Test. pm_shef 21:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- For clarification, Strelchik was in fact part of a group of people that has been nominated for the noble peace prize. He was one of the founding directors of the organization that has been nominated. This is verifiable.--69.156.151.238 19:12, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- He is a founding member of an organization which was nominated. He was not nominated, though I'd welcome any concrete proof you have to the contrary. And even so, being nominated for the prize still does not make one noteable - again, see wiki guidelines.pm_shef 21:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- As a final note before I stop commenting here, please consult wiht the Wiki Bio guidelines (link above) before voting. Do not vote on politics, vote on rules. pm_shef 21:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete nn. mikka (t) 22:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep major party candidate in a federal election. We actually have many hundreds of articles on these people. - SimonP 02:16, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep very notable person. this attempt to delete is politically motivated. We are having many proplems here in the city of Vaughan from a few elected officials who think they can dictate to everyone. --Eyeonvaughan 04:32, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- I dont think this article should be completely deleted, but definetly shortenned, to, as I have said, 2 or 3 sentences. Theonlyedge 22:49, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Strelchik is a rising star in his community. His list of accomplishments are amazing given his age, and he was very skillful and articulate in the election.
If his opponents each deserve pages, he does as well. In fact he deserves a page for the sole fact that he founded along with Craig Keilburger one of the most important huminitarian organizations in the world. And he crafted along with Mayors and Councillors the very influential York no-smoking bylaw. Not to mention the fact that his campaign received the highest percentage increase in votes in the election. Keep CasanovaAlive
- Note: user's first-ever edits under this user name were to this page and the Simon Strelchik article's talk page. Bearcat 08:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per CasanovaAlive --TheKvetch 00:45, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
- For clarification, past AFD's on unelected candidates have pretty consistently sawed off at the compromise position that they can be kept in a merged party candidates in X election list, but not generally as separate biographical articles unless they meet WP:BIO on other grounds beyond having been a political candidate. It may not be the ideal situation for some purposes, but as things currently stand it's what the established consensus happens to be. Accordingly, merge into New Democratic Party candidates, 2006 Canadian election. Bearcat 03:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- For clarification, Strelchik meets the WP:BIO because he is a longstanding "Major local political figure who receive significant press coverage." Also, as a founder of Free the Children, and an author of the influential York Region No Smoking Bylaw, he is a "Person achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events." Israelforever
- York By-law
- Note: user's first-ever edits under this user name were to this page. Bearcat 08:40, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep per SimonP. Ardenn 16:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Article should focus on his work in founding Free the Children, not his NDP candidacy. That is his claim to notability. Otherwise merge into New Democratic Party candidates, 2006 Canadian election as per Bearcat. Luigizanasi 18:15, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Party candidates in X election is precedent, yes, but I think it's getting awfully clumsy, especially when you have subsets of each sets of candidates who run again in Y election, and Z... do you have to have multiple iterations of the same person? Or do you refer additional references to the same repeat candidate to... the first? the most recent? the most important? But this is a broader discussion. Weak keep or (regular) merge. To Simon's supporters: Please don't try to stuff the ballot box here; let invested members of the Misplaced Pages community judge whether to take the article in on its own suitability. Nothing's keeping you from putting up a page about Simon on your own website. :) Samaritan 20:00, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
strong keep to Simon's non-supporters please don't try to stuff the ballot box here. let non-partisan wiki members judge this article. This attempt to delete is obviously politically motivated by a political opposition.--Eyeonvaughan 20:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Eyeonvaughan, the only ballot-stuffing going on here is from supporters of the article. Remember, WP:SOCK clearly spells out that contributors whose first known edit is to an AFD are at best suspicious, and at worst irrelevant and disregardable. And, for the record, you can can the allegations of partisan attacks; whatever your feelings about pm_shef, Misplaced Pages has a strict policy of assuming good faith in a dispute — and for what it's worth, I'm an NDPer and so's Samaritan, and we both expressed reservations about the article's keepworthiness too. Bearcat 22:52, 24 February 2006 (UTC)