Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ralph Mercier

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. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 08:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph Mercier

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Biography of a municipal-level politician, not properly demonstrated as the subject of enough significant

primary source that is not support for notability at all and five hits of purely local coverage in the local media, of which one is a very short blurb, one is a dead link and two are just routine obituaries. This is not enough coverage to make him more notable than the norm for this level of political office. Bearcat (talk) 22:02, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:02, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the

list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:02, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete Fails
WP:GNG.S. M. Nazmus Shakib (talk) 12:12, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Weak Delete seems to fail
talk) 06:35, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

The person held a major position in a renowned city from 1984 to 2001. There must be some references in offline sources. Gritmem (talk) 08:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesbourg is not a "renowned" city — and the office he did hold in a "renowned" city is not one that confers an automatic free pass over

WP:NPOL just because local coverage probably existed in their local media, because every city councillor in every city always has local coverage in their own local media. City councillors become notable if they have nationalizing coverage beyond just their own local media, and are not automatically notable just because they existed. Bearcat (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:ROUTINE
has already been shown last year not to apply to people.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ミラ P 16:27, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. In addition to expected articles in Quebec about his time as mayor, there were articles about his 2008 trip to France to trace his ancestors that made national news in Canada, including Ottawa, Edmonton and Vancouver; that doesn't happen if you're not notable. Plus who knows how much TV coverage he got.
YO 😜 17:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

None of this "trip to France to trace his ancestors" coverage has been shown, either in the article or in this discussion — so I searched in a database, and what I found was not articles about him, but articles which just included him giving brief soundbites to journalists whose core subject was the general concept of French Canadian genealogy, not specifically his genealogy. People are not notable just because they get quoted in articles about other subjects. Bearcat (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
He's front in center in the article and it adds to his notability.[1], [2]. Not to mention the likelihood of considerable French-language coverage. Have you even checked French-language sources?
YO 😜 15:58, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per Nazmus Shakib. 24.80.117.27 (talk) 22:32, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I do think it is likely that French language print sources from his extensive time as mayor of a large suburb of Quebec City would probably put him over the threshold at
WP:NPOL. In order to do that, one would need to access the newspaper archives from that time period. Does anyone have access to those?4meter4 (talk) 15:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Every mayor of everywhere always has or had some local coverage in their local media by definition, so just showing that some such coverage existed is not automatically enough to get a mayor over
WP:GNG in and of itself. Bearcat (talk) 20:56, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Its sources the keep side needs not assertions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Spartaz ^Humbug! 23:10, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep had significant political career with coverages from multiple sources. KartikeyaS (talk) 07:13, 10 March 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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ralph_Mercier&oldid=1168541009"