Edge Rewrite
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerry Connolly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Keep. Synergy 04:18, 18 October 2008 (UTC)reply

Gerry Connolly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Fails WP:POLITICIAN. Kmusgrave (talk) 00:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)reply

  • STRONG Keep as he easily passes WP:POLITICIAN: 2)"Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage. Generally speaking, mayors are likely to meet this criterion, as are members of the main citywide government or council of a major metropolitan city. 3) 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 primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." His coverage includes Michelle Malkin, Crooks and Liars, Washington Post #1, Not Larry Sabato, League of Conservative Voters, Washington Post #2, Below the Beltway, CBS News, Greater Greater Washington, Open Left, NBC4,,, and a whole slew of stuff on Google News. He definitely pases WP:POLITICIAN. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 01:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)reply
  • STRONG Keep, he won the Democratic primary so he's notable for that if nothing else. It's a very close race, so obviously he's a credible candidate. I see the person requesting this deletion, kmusgrave, has been actively editing his opponent's article. That article reads like a campaign brochure and doesn't have citations. We really don't need this sort of game-playing three weeks before the election. Flatterworld (talk)
  • Weak keep Article as it stands does not demonstrate notability; only the bits submitted by Schmidt demonstrate his notability — he's an elected local official and an unelected candidate for political office, and only is notable because he meets the primary notability criterion. Nyttend (talk) 02:41, 14 October 2008 (UTC)reply
Remark -- I can support the new standard DGG is proposing. Keep on that basis. RayAYang (talk) 04:29, 16 October 2008 (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.