Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Oates

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.

Rob Oates (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log

)

Non notable city council member. Admin removed speedy because he said that being a member of a small city council is a claim to notability. mboverload@ 05:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, treelo _radda 02:06, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Idaho-related deletion discussions. -- treelo _radda 02:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. Based on the available coverage and positions held does not seem to pass
  WP:POLITICIAN. Not much in GoogleNews[1]. However, there is one recent story in USAToday[2] which mentions him as the chairman of the Idaho Libertarian Party, in connection with the discussion of Bob Barr as being a possible libertarian presidential candidate. I gather that Oates was a Republican before and that this is a recent change. This may give him a higher profile and maybe wider national and state coverage. Still, for the moment such coverage does not seem to be avaialable. Nsk92 (talk) 03:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep This article clearly needs some work, but being chair of a state branch of a major third party should be good enough. The news coverage should be included to the extent that it exists (check the local papers), but it looks like he's legit. I added information I found about a run for the state assembly. Ran for assembly, Libertarian chair, local city council -- altogether it adds up to something. Avram (talk) 07:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Please look again at the article. I've dug up a lot of coverage of the guy in the Idaho papers. Apologies for the possibly not-useful links -- a lot of this might only be accessible though news archive services, but it's there. Avram (talk) 10:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, none of the claims to notability hold enough weight. Punkmorten (talk) 08:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 02:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete As per nom.
  talk) 03:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Please explain. The nomination asserts that he is a city council member and that that is not sufficient. Subsequent development of the article has revealed that he was a candidate for Idaho House of Representatives in the Republican primary, and that he is the state chair of a significant third party. All of this is covered in significant detail in multiple reliable news sources. Avram (talk) 06:32, 2 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.